PLEASE don't put photos on flickr

[rdenney]

On the subject of lasting value, it was my understanding that this forum inherited from the Greenspun forum the philosophy of providing a permanent record of knowledge as a resource for later searching. That is why in some threads I will post to fill in some gaps in case someone a year from now finds the thread and needs a more complete answer than the ones provided in the original thread.

If that's the case, then it seems to me that any picture used to illustrate technique, equipment, or a narrative should be hosted persistently.

Maybe I understood that wrong.

Photos posted in the image sharing threads are a different matter. Those only illustrate the photographer's vision at the time, and the photographer can eliminate them because they no longer represent his vision (or for some other reason). Those threads are there for inspiration more than instruction and if a photographer believes his images no longer suit that purpose then that is his choice.

I have left all my old images linked for many years now, even the ones I would like to do again today. The reason is that they still represent the views I expressed at the time they were linked, and I'm not particularly afraid of stupidities I have expressed in the past. But then I don't write stuff for Internet forums that are related to grocery money, and if I did, my strategies might be different.

I don't know why this discussion needs to challenge a persons validity or role in the forum.

Rick "who may have been a member for only a couple of years, but who has read many threads going back to the Greenspun days" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

I don't think these types of forums are particularly search-engine friendly, most people don't start threads with titles with future searchers in mind, which is a shame since a lot of good information is buried and useless... and frequent posters such as myself get tired of repeating themselves.

So all things considered, I'd be just as happy if the majority of the stuff here disappeared into the ether, most of it is embarrassing or stupid anyway.

[rdenney]

I don't think these types of forums are particularly search-engine friendly

Their own search engines are pretty limited--that's true. But I've dug up a lot of stuff from old archives using Google, limited to the site. A Google search reads all the way into the text, and also allows Google's better logic structure than most forum search engines. This will, of course, only improve.

I agree that a lot of what is said is ephemeral. But the problem of history is that one can't tell the ephemeral from the important at the time. And there's no telling whether some little tidbit of detail will keep some guy five years from now from wasting hours, or when it might give him the words needed for a better search attempt.

Rick "who has done a lot of Internet searching" Denney

[myoptic]

On the subject of lasting value, it was my understanding that this forum inherited from the Greenspun forum the philosophy of providing a permanent record of knowledge as a resource for later searching. That is why in some threads I will post to fill in some gaps in case someone a year from now finds the thread and needs a more complete answer than the ones provided in the original thread.

If that's the case, then it seems to me that any picture used to illustrate technique, equipment, or a narrative should be hosted persistently.

Maybe I understood that wrong.
.....

No, I think you have a very good understanding of the matter at hand.... but I'm sure you knew that.

[Kirk Gittings]

[QUOTE]f that's the case, then it seems to me that any picture used to illustrate technique, equipment, or a narrative should be hosted persistently./QUOTE]

While this is true in theory, there is no obligation to do so. You own your pictures posted here and can leave them up or withdraw them as you desire. Would you really want it otherwise? To make them permanent here implies transferring some permanent rights to the site. Would you want the site to own even limited use rights to your images?

[rdenney]

...You own your pictures posted here and can leave them up or withdraw them as you desire. Would you really want it otherwise? To make them permanent here implies transferring some permanent rights to the site. Would you want the site to own even limited use rights to your images?

Kirk, there is a difference between asking the moderators for a rule and making a recommendation to our fellow participants. I don't think anyone is asking for a rule; certainly not me. I think this was a request by one guy to others, for their consideration, to use a persistent hosting method if they want their posts to have lasting value, and if the picture is relevant to the meaning of the post.

Rick "preferring the arts of persuasion to rules" Denney

[al olson]

Leigh, I am in sympathy with your post and for some time have been considering a similar request. It is frustrating to catch up on a thread to find images missing and the subsequent comments about that image to be valueless.

In fact on the January 2011 Portraits thread, post #7, only 3 days old, has a "Content Protected by Owner" message where the image would be displayed. The subsequent comments posted there are irrelevant.

As a courtesy, I have taken to copying my images over to my web site provider and linking them in to the forum in the hope that they will be continually available, if not permanently, at least over a significant length of time, no matter how bad members may consider them to be. At least they are visible as a reference.

Sometimes it will happen that the link will be broken due to no fault of the author. However removing them or using a media provider that is not stable is a disservice to us other forum members.

[Leigh]

On the subject of lasting value, it was my understanding that this forum inherited from the Greenspun forum the philosophy of providing a permanent record of knowledge as a resource for later searching. That is why in some threads I will post to fill in some gaps in case someone a year from now finds the thread and needs a more complete answer than the ones provided in the original thread.

It really goes beyond that.

Everything posted on the web, whether in fora or in blogs or on your own website, is permanent by definition.

Take a look at the way-back machine (Google it). It will bring up website content from the initial site build through the latest revisions, for any site.

That's the way the internet works.

Even if you delete the original photo, or change its URL to break the links on the site, numerous other sites have copies of the photo, not just a link to it, so it's not possible to "erase" anything that's ever been posted.

Isn't modern technology wonderful???

- Leigh

[Oren Grad]

Everything posted on the web, whether in fora or in blogs or on your own website, is permanent by definition.

Take a look at the way-back machine (Google it). It will bring up website content from the initial site build through the latest revisions, for any site.

That's the way the internet works.

The Internet Archive ("Wayback Machine") provides only fragmentary coverage of the web. Search for any particular content from past years and that will quickly be apparent. There's plenty of detail here about how and why the Archive is not complete.

Nor is the Internet Archive itself in any way assured to be permanent. It's not "the internet" - it's a data-archiving initiative by a particular private organization that may or may not last.

Nothing on the web is permanent "by definition". On the contrary: by default, web content is highly fugitive.

[Paul_C]

I think this was a request by one guy to others, for their consideration, to use a persistent hosting method

flickr is just as persistent as any other hosting method.