Flickr

There are some great street photography groups on Flickr (HCSP and SPNC for example) with interviews and discussions that are worth spending time there. Some of the best contemporary street photographers participate there. I don't care much for the Explore thingie, but this was the only photo of mine that once got Explored... a street child portrait.


cambodia-4 by aad_b, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
mathomas said:
Dude, pretty much every one of your portraits is explore-worthy!
Click to expand...

haha based on this discussion I don't know if "explore-worthy" is a good thing :D:D:D:D

But ya, I don't know why it made it when I had other more popular ones that didn't. But I do consider the public taste to some degree, even though that doesn't mean I would change my methodology to make what they want to see.
 
Q about paid pro-account. once the period ends, does the site force 200 image limit again, and all but latest 200 images are hidden? or perhaps it limits to current images, and starts hiding again from the oldest?
 
jarski said:
Q about paid pro-account. once the period ends, does the site force 200 image limit again, and all but latest 200 images are hidden? or perhaps it limits to current images, and starts hiding again from the oldest?
Click to expand...

They describe it on the site, but to my recollection everything you've uploaded stays, but the amateur (non-pro :)) account limitations kick back in on new stuff.
 
Araakii said:
haha based on this discussion I don't know if "explore-worthy" is a good thing :D:D:D:D

But ya, I don't know why it made it when I had other more popular ones that didn't. But I do consider the public taste to some degree, even though that doesn't mean I would change my methodology to make what they want to see.
Click to expand...


Heh. Yeah, I think "interestingness" (as flickr calls it) is an appropriate name for what gets stuff into Explore. Their algorithm just figures out "interestingness" based on a number of static and dynamic attributes of uploaded photos. It doesn't measure "meaning", or "beauty", or "importance" or "taste", or whatever. Just, "is it interesting by some definition of interesting?"

Your photos, esp your cosplay portraits, are all interesting, so they're all Explore material, IMO.

Anyway, all that typing I did wasn't directed right at you, but to explain to everyone why some pretty bad stuff finds its way into Explore. It was at least interesting, in some way, for some period of time.
 
mathomas said:
Heh. Yeah, I think "interestingness" (as flickr calls it) is an appropriate name for what gets stuff into Explore. Their algorithm just figures out "interestingness" based on a number of static and dynamic attributes of uploaded photos. It doesn't measure "meaning", or "beauty", or "importance" or "taste", or whatever. Just, "is it interesting by some definition of interesting?"

Your photos, esp your cosplay portraits, are all interesting, so they're all Explore material, IMO.

Anyway, all that typing I did wasn't directed right at you, but to explain to everyone why some pretty bad stuff finds its way into Explore. It was at least interesting, in some way, for some period of time.
Click to expand...

Yes Mike, cosplay will be my long-term project to pursue at least until the end of next year. Hopefully I can turn this project into a book eventually.
 
jarski said:
Q about paid pro-account. once the period ends, does the site force 200 image limit again, and all but latest 200 images are hidden? or perhaps it limits to current images, and starts hiding again from the oldest?
Click to expand...


That's pretty much it. Flickr claims that all your photos are kept on their servers but only the most recently uploaded 200 of them are displayed unless you ante up. And of course over time as you add new photos, some drop off the bottom of the lsit of 200. But $25 per year is such a trivial amount I am more than happy to do so. Another slightly odd thing I have noticed is that if you erase an image the number of hits it has had (which contribute to your overall hit count) stay in your stats. This is understandable, I guess, on the grounds that those stats are supposed to represent how many people have visited your page / images - but it did strike me as surprising at first. I assume the same applies to the photos hidden when your account reverts to a free one.
 
I use flickr almost every day. That means, I go online and upload a photo or two and browse some groups I enjoy (HCSP for one). Call me an asshole but I almost never comment other peoples photos. I just like having a place where I can make sets and show my work to friends.

I've been on explore over 15 times in the last year or so, but I honestly don't pay much attention to it because as stated in this thread, most of the stuff up there is garbage.

People need to remember that explore is a popularity algorithm, rather than an image quality algorithm. It simply showcases what people like that day.
 
I find Flickr quite helpfull when considering lenses. Any lens can show 10 good pictures in a thread on rff. And with enough post processing any lens can be made to look like any other in one picture. But look through a whole flickr group of a particular lens and you usually get a feel for it's characteristics. Thankfully a flickr has many bad pictures on it that can show the pitfalls of any lens.
 
Flickr is mosty cr@p of course. That doesnt mean it doesnt have its moments of brilliance, or that you cant find a nice little fringe that works for you.

A few years ago I had a small portfolio of street shots and nothing to do with them, so I sent them to in-public. A couple of days later Blake Edwards' mailbox responded with a copy-paste message that "my portfolio is not suitable for in-pubic at this stage" or something along those lines, so I said LOL, I didnt expect to get into in-public I was just after some feedback. Blake said the best place for that back then was the HCSP critique thread. So I started a flickr account just for that and he was right, it was great and still is, at least for this genre of photography. Later I managed to get a few photos in the pool and I actually felt quite proud, not because it means anything, but because I knew why they got in, they looked how I wanted them to look and it was the result of a conscious effort and a gradual improvement. The group is also a massive resource for books, videos, news and all sorts of discussions around street photography, eg it was the place that John Maloof came to 3 years ago to figure out what to do with Vivian Meier's box of negatives. That discussion is still going.

I also follow a local group of film photographers, we run exhibitions and comps through there, swap gear and even organise our bulk orders of film from overseas which in Australia can save you a fair bit of money.

Those 2 groups are the only reason I have a flickr account, as for "explore" I'm not even sure what it is to be honest.

Flickr can be nice, ignore explore and find your fringe. Find likeminded people, they're in there somewhere.
 
For me, Flickr is a "haystack" that seems to grow exponentially and in which it can be difficult to find the "needle". I quite like it but hitting the right groups has been key. There's just so much duplication and, with limited time to do the searching, it occasionally leaves me feeling frustrated if I've spent an hour trawling round and found little but mediocrity.

Explore can be okay but, as one of the earlier posts suggests, I'm sure there are those who know how to play the system.
 
Maybe I don't know about it enough but I actually don't like the HCSP group. To me they are really restricting "street photography" down to the particular type that they prefer and I think a lot of people think that that is the type of stuff to go for, when it's only just one particular type of photography among many other possibilities.
 
For the love of all things holy...speaking of flickr, I managed to stumble across some guy called Trey Ratcliff (aka Stuck in Customs), who specializes in making my eyes ache through what seems like a direct injection of hallucinogens into my retina. We can debate the merits of HDR, I suppose, but this is ridiculous.

I will provide no link for your own health and safety... :eek:
 
Araakii said:
Maybe I don't know about it enough but I actually don't like the HCSP group. To me they are really restricting "street photography" down to the particular type that they prefer and I think a lot of people think that that is the type of stuff to go for, when it's only just one particular type of photography among many other possibilities.
Click to expand...

hmmm... yes and no, they do have modern/unusual preferences but will promote various classic style street shot as long as they're good. Besides, who is they? The "admins" have changed at least 5 times that I can remember, and with them changes the whole aesthetic of the group.

Regardless, it's always a good place for honest critique. Maybe too honest for most.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top