All-new Flickr comes with free terabyte and ads, update for Android app

To me it looks like the wall of a teenager's bedroom. Terribly busy, visual nightmare. But as with Photoshop, someone has decided on my behalf that it's an improvement.

I'm a bit puzzled by the invitation to upload photos at full resolution. Is this to make sure that when they are stolen, the person grabbing them has the best possible quality?

Make sure everything is backed up in a cheap 2 terabyte HD before uploading(file structure in all), I have a feeling Yahoo is waiting for everyone to quickly use it up so in time Yahoo can dictate a higher annual rate, $100, $150, $200, $250......$500. Yahoo is hoping Flickr is your go to cloud service, why not(free 2T, $50 no advert.) and it'll be so time consuming to re-download your files that you'll just pay whatever annual fee they'll charge in the future. It is so much easier to click "delete Flickr account" than re-downloading your originals.

Interface feels very cramped...
Still like the 500px interface..Flickr is trying very hard though ..1 TB limit is a superb deal.

I'm not a fan of the new Flickr. What I don't like about a new layout is that you can't see the story that goes with a photo from the photographer or discussion, that happened after somebody commented, etc... Flickr Is not only about sharing, it's about discussions as well and for now I don't find this new platform to be convenient. Hope it will get better :)

Hang on, did they double the price of a 'Pro' (= ad free) account? Yahoo may have just talked me out of spending any money with them next year...

I was just uploading a few photos to my account from under Safari - and the Flickr upload webpage was totally screwed - items/buttons overlapping, the 'upload' button nearly completely hidden behind top bar.

I mean, c'mon Flickr! Can't you guys test a little before you roll out such a large update?

Flickr took heat from some quarters for having an "outdated" interface by comparison to other sites. I tried a few of the other sites, like 500px and SmugMug, but always came back to Flickr for a few reasons:

1) The interface was so old -- and easy to use -- that nearly everyone understood it at a glance. By "everyone," I mean my parents and other technophobes, for whom change is more than inconvenient, a horror.

2) The primary viewing page for a photo was loaded with information: title, notes, geo-location, set/group membership, and basic exposure data. Most of this stuff is still there, sort of, but requires scrolling down to see it. The map, however, is missing, one of the more compelling features, as no other site had it so prominently displayed.

3) White. This seems to go against most other users, but I preferred the white background. It was friendlier, not so nakedly "artistic" or whatever.

I'm sure I'll get used to the new, but I feel like I've lost a friend.

flickr is just an easy way to steal images.

Want a wide angle shot of a barn that looks good. Search for nikon 14-24 lens. Im sure youll find a barn you like, poof that image is now in some book that you wont know about.
I found one of my baby goose pics in a book and the author told me to screw myself and that the image wasnt copyrighted.

Water marks are easily removed or cropped out.

meh

I *just* signed up for a 2-year $45 Pro account that turns out to be completely worthless now as the free account already provides the storage I signed up for. Wish there was a refund option...

Newsflash folks. This is capitalism. Yahoo, owner of Flickr, will always need higher profits and the best way in a post labor economy to do that is to reduce service and increase fees. Things can only go down.

i like.

has anyone noticed that you can upload the same photo to different websites (dpreview, flickr, facebook, etc...) and they all show the shot differently? facebook is the worst. i think they use 4 bit color.

ps. this is day one. i suspect that we will learn more in the next week or so. i would also bet that we see some incremental updates now that it is live

Looks good to me. Only the mix of comments and images at the frontpagina, I do not like. But I never use that page :-)

I find it appealing

There are ads on Flickr? Not on this guys machine.

I like it. I gives me a broader view of the content. And I have already deleted pics that do not really look right there. So, have to wait and see. But for now I think it is fine.

I like the new layout. The old one had too many white areas.
According to the information mailed to me, Flickr Pro accounts will suffer no changes, but if it does it's akin to what Adobe is doing with CC: ending old subscriptions in order to charge more. Hope it doesn't happen.

It looks completely disgusting. The user interface is awful and the changes totally suck.

DREADFUL, COMPLETELY DREADFUL

WHERE ARE THE MAPS ?!?!?

I just checked it out, and I've decided to go with the free account, downgrading from my pro one. I'm not a pro, and anyway, there are so many ads on the web I've just naturally started to filter them out with my eyes.

I appreciate the longer video times available on the free account, and if I ever run out of space, I'll just open another account.

Regarding the look of the new one, it's muuuuch better than the old flickr. All that white was a bit distracting.

I liked it better when the map, metadata and description were right beside the photo. Now you have to scroll to see the description and metadata and the maps seem to have disappeared. If you wanted to view the photo on black, all you had to do is click it.

Surely in all that black space they now have they could have at least found a place to put this small amount of information.

Sucks really bad!

Lars's front page is slightly misleading, all the images are recent uploads of the same subject. In actuality you will get a jumble of recent uploads. If Lars were to upload a wedding and a baby shot, they would mix up with his marvelous landscapes. How 'Pro.' is that!? BTW: I'f you're thinking of jumping ship, Yahoo have bought out Tumblr as well:( Looks as if they could be merged in the future?

Overall I'm in favour. I think many of the objections are just a 'shock' reaction which will dissipate pretty quickly as people get used to the new look and work out how to use it.

BUT - I think they've made one hideous mistake, which is that we can no longer browse photographs with the data on the right. Sure we want the best possible view of the photographs (which was already possible using the Lightbox) but sometimes the data is part of what you want to browse and now you have to actively scroll down to see it. Imagine doing that dozens or hundreds of times...

Also in the views where we have screenfuls of justified images, I'd like the option to choose much smaller images.

One final thought - I have fibre broadband so it's all very slick, but I wonder what this is like to use on a slower connection???

I like the new design (it looks like facebook!)... but why so many photos displayed on the main photostream ?

This is the end of flickr as we knew it...
I don't even dare to imagine what kind of "photographers" this new slimy crap will attract. At least yahoo could offer us an alternative layout to view things, to get rid of the unnecessary "features" introduced for the "gregarious" people who end up here in search of another "social" experience after playing around with twitter and facebook for hours... :[

I do hope the new larger limit does not encourage lots of video. There are many other sites for sharing videos I would prefer it if Flickr was still images only.

I like the new look and I will be taking advantage of the $25 'ad-free' option as I am currently a 'pro' user.

The link to the Flickr blog ("it's blog" in the third paragraph) is broken.

Well I for one think it looks fabulous

My impressions so far:

Pros:
- I like the new, uncluttered photostream. It really focues on the pictures alone. That's a good thing. If I want more information I can still get them with a few clicks.
- Scrolling through pictures is fluent and well presented.
- Sharing and commenting are well placed and easily accessible when needed.

Cons:
- The title picture is too high, wastes a lot of screen estate that serves little to no purpose. Half the height would have been perfectly sufficient.
- I really don't get the subcription business model. Why is just 1 TB of additional storage worth TEN TIMES the cost of the normal subscription? Are there additional benefits that I'm not aware of? Is there a genuine Marissa Mayer Christmas card included?
- Wouldn't it be better to have it like this? Ads: 1 TB, No Ads:2 TB, Premium: Unlimited

I guess there will be a heated discussion in the days to come.

Seems like an epic fail for Yahoo marketing. No one can understand their new product line.

1 TB but with bandwidth limit... So to use 1TB on the free account will take you about 280 years to upload at 300 mb/month.

What on earth are they actually including in the $500 account? It can't just be 2TB of storage if they're giving 1TB away for free. I mean you could just get 2 free accounts. I'm worried because I want to know what I'll be losing if I can't afford the $500... and I can't! (I hope we still get stats)

Three things I like from it regardless of the horrible interface:

1. Original size is available now for all subscriptions
2. I can share my photos to preset sizes.
3. Picture looks better from Flickr than DPR gallery.

Thanks Yahoo.

Where do I find which exposure settings were used on a photo? If the user didn't strip that info, it used to be displayed on the bottom right side of the screen. Now I can't find it.

Where is the option to view EXIF info?

How do I replace a photo?

Looks nice, but it's slow. Usability is more important to me than looks.

is there any count or stats for the free account?
quite like the detailed one.

I will not be renewing my Pro account either - I will keep Flickr for 'everyday' stuff and move my better work to Zenfolio which I think is much more worth the money.

Any changes to the Flickr API? I develop with that for my site.