peterm1
Mentor
I don't mind Flickr, although like you, its limitations occasionally annoy me (but all sites have them so wot ya gunna do!!??) For example I would like to see greater flexibility in the templates available to display images although having said that the one I use is at least aesthetically acceptable. Perhaps they could do this by having a wider range of templates for paying users (the pro grade members) which might induce more people to join. And adding photos to groups can be a bit painful sometimes - e.g. if a group is not accepting new images or you have exceeded your limit for the day Flickr gives an error message after you have made the attempt and kicks you back to the beginning of the list of groups. You then have to navigate back to where you left off. Neither does it warn you before you attempt to link an image to a group in those circumstances (e.g. by greying out that group in the list) so you have to go thru the whole exercise first. Which can be a pain iif there is a long list of groups you subscribe to and you have to start scrolling back to where you were before you made the attempt. Little things like that can be annoyances, I grant you.
Some things I positively do like. At the macro level I like that it creates a community of users who can see and be seen by others.
And, at the micro level, while I have not yet used it, Flickr allows the user to replace an existing image with a replacement image from the user's hard drive. This is good as occasionally after I upload an image I see something about it I would like to fix (that cannot be done using on site tools). I am not sure however how this affects the view count for that image.
Flickr's batch upload client works reasonably well and I tend to use it with FastStone photo resizer to resize my images to a suitable size for viewing on screen. (Resize first then upload using the Flickr client).
So all in all I will stick to Flickr - certainly for now. I have certainly considered setting up my own site using Wordpress, Tumblr or one of the other hosting options for blogs but I cannot imagine getting as much exposure doing this alone - perhaps as a supplement to Flickr ??!!
Some things I positively do like. At the macro level I like that it creates a community of users who can see and be seen by others.
And, at the micro level, while I have not yet used it, Flickr allows the user to replace an existing image with a replacement image from the user's hard drive. This is good as occasionally after I upload an image I see something about it I would like to fix (that cannot be done using on site tools). I am not sure however how this affects the view count for that image.
Flickr's batch upload client works reasonably well and I tend to use it with FastStone photo resizer to resize my images to a suitable size for viewing on screen. (Resize first then upload using the Flickr client).
So all in all I will stick to Flickr - certainly for now. I have certainly considered setting up my own site using Wordpress, Tumblr or one of the other hosting options for blogs but I cannot imagine getting as much exposure doing this alone - perhaps as a supplement to Flickr ??!!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Flickr has it's dedicated following and deserves it IMO ... it's not perfect but it works and it doesn't look as ****ty as some of the other sites in terms of a free account.
Personally I'm a Zenfolio fan and have had a paid account there for several years.
Personally I'm a Zenfolio fan and have had a paid account there for several years.
user237428934
User deletion pending
If you want to show your photos in a particular order, you can create an album where you arrange the photos as you like. Just send people the link to that album.
willie_901
Mentor
At least Flickr never attempted to use your work for advertising without any possibility of compensation.
Trying to sell your content without compensation is what sucks.
Trying to sell your content without compensation is what sucks.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Been using flickr since 2007.
No complaints. It is what it is. And it's cheap, good enough for lots of stuff. I find it easy to use.
Have also self hosted, hosted my stuff on a custom GoDaddy hosted site, used other types of photo streams, used SmugMug, etc. They've all worked fine and achieved my goal of getting the work out there. Flickr is less work than most.
G
No complaints. It is what it is. And it's cheap, good enough for lots of stuff. I find it easy to use.
Have also self hosted, hosted my stuff on a custom GoDaddy hosted site, used other types of photo streams, used SmugMug, etc. They've all worked fine and achieved my goal of getting the work out there. Flickr is less work than most.
G
Greyscale
Mentor
The only problem with this, that I can see, is that it changes the image url when it replaces the old image, which will result in broken image links if you have previously posted the image in a forum or on a web page. It does not affect image view count, or the appearance of the image in Flickr group pools or favorite lists, or images posted in Flickr groups when brackets are used instead of HTML. If you use the online Aviary editor for image manipulation, I don't think that this is a problem.
ajramirez
Established
It's not the cleanest solution, but if you go into Edit titles, tags, and dates (in the Actions drop down menu) you can play with the date and time the photos were uploaded to place them in the order you want.
Cheers,
Antonio
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
I find Flickr's feature of organizing your images into sets to be very useful, especially for creating slideshows that are thematic or topically relevant. Then you can send someone the URL to the set, or link the set's URL to another site.
If you don't mess with the order of your photostream, and cross-link images directly from your photostream, you won't have broken links.
I've been writing a blogger-based blog since 2006, and most all of its images have been cross-linked from Flickr with little or no broken links.
~Joe
If you don't mess with the order of your photostream, and cross-link images directly from your photostream, you won't have broken links.
I've been writing a blogger-based blog since 2006, and most all of its images have been cross-linked from Flickr with little or no broken links.
~Joe
back alley
IMAGES
i like flickr...25 bucks a year and all the storage/back up for my images that i could ever want.
i post most everything there...and i use an image blog for my 'better' stuff.
i post most everything there...and i use an image blog for my 'better' stuff.
Murchu
Well-known
Never liked the UI of Flickr, it's always been the thing that kept me from using it more, or at all really. That said, with all the shenanigans of a lot of the other 'free' sites, Flickr is starting to look pretty damn good again..
Addy101
Well-known
Positively hate Flickr 
All those links that are "temporarily unavailable", the strange way you have to go to the EXIF and the fact that it is impossible (? at least I haven't found it) to see more then the next or previous picture in a gallery. Sometimes I get to a gallery and then I click a picture and I go back to that stupid "previous-next" system :bang:
I'm using Smugmug. Might be more expensive then Flickr, but at least it is the way I want a gallery to look like
All those links that are "temporarily unavailable", the strange way you have to go to the EXIF and the fact that it is impossible (? at least I haven't found it) to see more then the next or previous picture in a gallery. Sometimes I get to a gallery and then I click a picture and I go back to that stupid "previous-next" system :bang:
I'm using Smugmug. Might be more expensive then Flickr, but at least it is the way I want a gallery to look like
Godfrey
somewhat colored
If you use the hard link (the only way currently to make a flickr hosted image embed into an email here), yes: you have to go back and edit the post with the new hard link.
If, however, you post the flickr page link, a replacement image will show up when people access that page without any problems.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Positively hate Flickr
All those links that are "temporarily unavailable", the strange way you have to go to the EXIF and the fact that it is impossible (? at least I haven't found it) to see more then the next or previous picture in a gallery. Sometimes I get to a gallery and then I click a picture and I go back to that stupid "previous-next" system :bang:
I'm using Smugmug. Might be more expensive then Flickr, but at least it is the way I want a gallery to look like
I wouldn't even consider Flickr to showcase a gallery of my work. That's what I write web display code for, or use services (SmugMug et al) which make that easy.
Flickr.com is for quick and easy sharing of images, for me anyway, unless I really need to be quick ... then I just drop the photo into a DropBox public folder and acquire a link to send or paste into messages.
G
kuzano
Mentor
Yeah...I really dislike it .....
Yeah...I really dislike it .....
I got some ideas.
I think I'm gonna put up an image hosting sight and keep track of over 6 Billion images and 50 Million users.
Shouldn't be too hard?
Yeah...I really dislike it .....
I got some ideas.
I think I'm gonna put up an image hosting sight and keep track of over 6 Billion images and 50 Million users.
Shouldn't be too hard?
Vince Lupo
Nobody's Mentor
I'm quite happy with Flickr. Though I do pay an annual fee for a 'pro' account, I find it to be much better than Photobucket (which seems to be only concerned with delivering advertising to its users).
Murchu
Well-known
Who cares if it's hard or not, it's their business. By your logic, nobody should ever comment on gmail for example, good or bad, as google is dealing with so much data, and it's hardly easy. There are no points for effort, just as you likely didn't buy your last camera because the manufacturer tried so hard to make a good one..
28mm
Established
Flickr is not a not a portfolio site. Instead, it's a photoblog, which is why the default view is the way it is. You can change the sequencing of images by editing the post dates, and it's clunky because that's not the original intent. If you want to change a sequence, I recommend creating a set, and there you can just drag-n-drop in the Organizer.
If you just want a portfolio site, look into SmugMug or whatever else. If you like discovering other people who take photos using similar cameras, or shoot similar subject matter, Flickr is pretty awesome.
If you just want a portfolio site, look into SmugMug or whatever else. If you like discovering other people who take photos using similar cameras, or shoot similar subject matter, Flickr is pretty awesome.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
flickr is ok for me, the others not....
dct
perpetual amateur
Same dislike
Same dislike
I tried few years ago and found the same problems. Deleted my account.
Same dislike
Positively hate Flickr
All those links that are "temporarily unavailable", the strange way you have to go to the EXIF and the fact that it is impossible (? at least I haven't found it) to see more then the next or previous picture in a gallery. Sometimes I get to a gallery and then I click a picture and I go back to that stupid "previous-next" system :bang:[...]
I tried few years ago and found the same problems. Deleted my account.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Positively hate Flickr
All those links that are "temporarily unavailable", the strange way you have to go to the EXIF and the fact that it is impossible (? at least I haven't found it) to see more then the next or previous picture in a gallery. Sometimes I get to a gallery and then I click a picture and I go back to that stupid "previous-next" system :bang:
I'm using Smugmug. Might be more expensive then Flickr, but at least it is the way I want a gallery to look like
you mean this?
The reason is, that the photo owner deleted the image. Only solution: flickr prohibits that photos are deleted. Don't think that will be accepted. Who's to blame? flickr or the person who linked the photo and then deleted it?