Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: OT: Flickr is deleting user photos

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,609

    Default OT: Flickr is deleting user photos

    Here we go again. Flickr is starting to delete photos for free users who have more than 1,000. Flickr doesn't get used as much as some aternatives, but it is worth a warning. They want $50/year for hosting, for now.

    I've been using the free service http://use.com since 2012 for forum image hosting (I have my own server for important stuff). They seem to be a great alternative - unlimited image size, stable interface that isn't frequently changing, video support, etc.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47130138

    "BBC News, Feb 5 2019 Photo-sharing website Flickr is starting to delete users' photos after changing its terms and conditions.

    The firm announced in November that it would no longer be allowing its members one terabyte of free storage. Under the new rules, there is a limit of 1,000 photographs for those who do not subscribe to the service at a cost of $49.99 (38) per year."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Welcome to the world of paying one's way. The free offers are slowly finding out they don't survive without someone paying. Back in the day $50 of film and processing would get you about 50 photos. 1000 for nothing still sounds like a deal to me. Andy (who has been a Pro account holder for quite a while)
    Andrew R Stewart
    You Think too Much

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rugby, Warwickshire, England
    Posts
    967

    Default

    I could never understand how the likes of flikr/photobucket etc. could offer large amounts of resilient storage for no money. Steve Stallings metalworking.com dropbox worked very well as a low bandwidth mostly text based facility, much as I host files on my own servers. Large amounts of storage/resiliancy/backup/bandwidth cost money.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    4,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rand View Post
    I could never understand how the likes of flikr/photobucket etc. could offer large amounts of resilient storage for no money.
    -Same as Facebook: you, the guy posting the photos, were the product, not the customer.

    Places like Photobucket offered a "free" service, but paid for it by feeding you ads, and later, selling your data in bulk to other advertisers. And for many years, it was quite lucrative.

    However, Google and Facebook have tied up virtually the entire web-advertising model, and FB in particular actively discourages 'third party' photo posting, and discourages the use of FB-posted photos outside of FB.

    So groups like Photobucket are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Their user base is declining- they're all moving to Facebook- and the ad revenue is declining both due to a hard drop in the value of an ad and due to the same loss in traffic (again, having to compete with Google and FB.)

    The only thing keeping Photobucket going is those few as found on boards like this- people who don't generally use Facebook, and don't have their own server or storage space to load photos into. A group that is declining, by the way, as more and more people continue to jump over to Facebook.

    Doc.
    Doc's Machine. (Probably not what you expect.)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Stevens Point, WI
    Posts
    7,715

    Default

    If its not free I won't be posting any pics. Simple as that.
    Andy

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rugby, Warwickshire, England
    Posts
    967

    Default

    I guess that running one's own server must be a better option, assuming that one has the acquired skills and motivation to do that. Me and her indoors have got about 20GB that we let the world see. But I use the same server at my mail server, firewall, dns server and monitoring machine. There's another 14GB on another web server after I separated the website and forum of the pet rat club off the domestic server.

    The cost of running both of them is about $50 per year in electricity and about $600 in hardware amortised over 10 years or so. the admin costs are hard to calculate, but surprisingly few hours per year.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vpt View Post
    If its not free I won't be posting any pics. Simple as that.

    I guess we just found out how much you value this stuff. Andy
    Andrew R Stewart
    You Think too Much

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,609

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew R Stewart View Post
    I guess we just found out how much you value this stuff. Andy
    Eh. There are still *great* alternatives. http://use.com doesn't even accept money for the service. Their user interface is simple and excellent.

    It has been stable and essentially unchanged since 2012, when I started using it. At that time I was drawn to the unlimited image sizes. Competing sites were already drastically restricting image sizes and they were convoluting their interfaces with awful javascript. Their upload tools did not work well.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Their tactics backfired here. If they had simply stopped allowing further uploads if you had more than 1000 photos, then I would have considered going pro... But threatening to delete my old photos to motivate me, ticks me off.

    I believe it will be cheaper for me to get some webhosting like in the old days. I could FTP files or I could make my own file uploading software, probably some existing freeware stuff around as well. And with the imageresizer module installed I can resize pictures on the fly.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    SW Kansas
    Posts
    251

    Default

    I am new to this photo posting thing, I am not tec savvy at all. I have been using Tapatalk and I like it its very easy for me to use.
    Who hosts the photos I am posting
    Is there any downsides to Tapatalk?
    It’s almost too easy, what am I missing?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •