View Full Version : PLEASE don't put photos on flickr
How many times have you scanned through a thread only to see numerous instances of
"This photo is not available" accompanied by the flickr logo?
If you expect your information to persist in the forum threads, please use hosting sites that will keep the images online.
Donning my asbestos suit, I remain affectionately...
- Leigh
Typically that happens when the person removes the photo from flickr or changes the permissions such that the photo can no longer be seen. It has nothing to do with any kind unreliability of flickr and people are just as capable of breaking image links to any other host.
That said, it is annoying and despite having completely fine hosting I've taken to attaching images directly to posts on threads.
c.d.ewen
6-Jan-2011, 15:01
I will include offsite (photobucket.com) photos inline, then attach the same photos to the post. I do this for the convenience of the immediate reader - they can read the text and see the photos at the same time. Readers at a later date will have to click on the thumnails.
Charley
Just use the link from the thumbnail inline.
The forum image hosting crushes detail quite a bit, which I think is why many people use other hosting. Also the thumbs could be larger. But of course, its not my forum and I'm not paying the bandwidth.
I hate it too when images are no longer available, which seems to happen with surprising frequency and quickness.
Typically that happens when the person removes the photo from flickr or changes the permissions such that the photo can no longer be seen. It has nothing to do with any kind unreliability of flickr and people are just as capable of breaking image links to any other host.
While that may be true in theory, I never see it.
There are no similar failures from Zenfolio or other hosting sites, on which the OPs could take similar actions.
- Leigh
While that may be true in theory, I never see it.
Convince the bulk of people to use Zenfolio, or whatever else, and you will.
You see it from flickr because that's what most people use. You probably notice it more from flickr because they use that flickr replacement image.
I've used Flickr to host my blog's photos for several years now. I've yet to lose a link to one. And I'm currently a non-paying member, meaning that my earlier images are still linkable, but I can't access them directly from my Flickr photostream unless I pay up.
So I really don't understand why people have the issues they do with broken image links to Flickr; it may have something to do with how they link the image. I always right click the image, click "properties" and copy/past the full url address. Using the flash-based embedded image management features built into Flickr may be the problem.
~Joe
jim kitchen
6-Jan-2011, 18:44
If you expect your information to persist in the forum threads...
- Leigh
Dear Leigh,
Are you assuming that folks want their images to persist ? ... :)
For myself, I do not, therefore my images will disappear.
jim k
Are you assuming that folks want their images to persist ? ... :)
For myself, I do not, therefore my images will disappear.
If the image is an integral part of the post, affecting the meaning thereof, and you delete it, then your post is no longer meaningful.
Your choice.
- Leigh
jim kitchen
6-Jan-2011, 20:39
Dear Leigh,
Get enriched, get over it, and yes it is my choice... :)
Any image that is removed from any post, for whatever reason, happens. If you assume that anyone's post is therefore, meaningless because an image is removed, you have much to learn within this group, and a very steep hill to climb, regarding an earned respect among the members. This group is not Flickr nor is it designed to be.
Like I said, get over it, and quickly.
jim k
If you assume that anyone's post is therefore, meaningless because an image is removed, you have much to learn...
Sorry, Jim.
I thought you could understand plain English.
My bad. :eek:
- Leigh
Dear Leigh,
Are you assuming that folks want their images to persist ? ... :)
For myself, I do not, therefore my images will disappear.
jim k
Obviously, as in
You might remember this reposted view, too.
jim k
Gateway Valley, Near the Alberta and British Columbia Border, Canada, 1986
and
Another repeat oldie...
jim k
Hoar Frost, Vermillion Crossing, British Columbia, Canada, 1986
Those are posts #805 and #806 in the LF Landscapes thread.
So do you claim that those posts are still meaningful with the images deleted?
- Leigh
If you stop and read what Jim said, you might reach a conclusion that he may not have intended those images to persist. Not everybody considers static permanence as an inherent value.
Of course, I am not assuming that that is indeed what Jim meant, I am only stating one possible interpretation. Assumptions in general are just logic's poor cousins... ;)
spkennedy3000
7-Jan-2011, 02:16
Personally I agree with Leigh, it is a little bit annoying looking through a thread full of really nice images and then you get a whole load of Flickr "Image not available" icons...
Making it a philosophical issue just sounds a bit silly.
Jiri Vasina
7-Jan-2011, 02:57
I self-host my images, but yet, there have been times when I decided to remove some images from the server, knowing that it will affect links from outside too...
There can be a multitude of reasons to do so, like not being happy with the image anymore (or even get embarrassed to present it because of some flaw that was previously unknown to me, and now is too obvious - as an "artist" I change (??grow?? ;) ), my views change, ...), outside conditions may change - if the picture is of people, they may decide their picture not to be presented in that way anymore... or whatever.
And it's the same with images on Flickr. I for one don't have a "pro" account there, so am limited to 200 images. I have to make room for new ones, deleting older less successful ones (by any measure of "successful")... That's just one more reason why the images might be removed from the posts in this forum... (on my personal server, space was not an issue so far...)
Do I like it when I come across a post with a deleted image, especially when they are necessary to illustrate the post? No, certainly not. Do I get angry/annoyed? Probably not, hopefully not, I try not to... Life changes, nothing is permanent...
(It's the same with everything... How many times have I gone out to a shop that was there, has had the precise thing I wanted - just to find out the shop is not there anymore, it does not carry the item anymore...)
Ramiro Elena
7-Jan-2011, 03:26
I host my images in Flickr. I find it easy and convenient. I have noticed some of my images disappear too. I didn't know what it was until recently. If you edit in Picnik or replace the image the url is changed and the link is broken. I wish I could edit my older posts to fix this but you can't if someone replies after you.
Ben Syverson
7-Jan-2011, 06:43
If I have to stop posting images from flickr, then I expect everyone else to stop posting images with watermarks.
We all have our pet peeves, but come on...
Jim Michael
7-Jan-2011, 07:05
Persistence is futile.
Steve Gledhill
7-Jan-2011, 07:23
Persistence is futile.
Jim, as well as being a photographer are you a Vogon Guard?
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
7-Jan-2011, 07:47
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.
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
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
7-Jan-2011, 11:07
[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?
...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
7-Jan-2011, 13:53
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.
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??? :rolleyes:
- Leigh
Oren Grad
7-Jan-2011, 15:30
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 (http://www.archive.org/about/faqs.php#The_Wayback_Machine) 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.
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.
John NYC
7-Jan-2011, 17:28
How many times have you scanned through a thread only to see numerous instances of
"This photo is not available" accompanied by the flickr logo?
If you expect your information to persist in the forum threads, please use hosting sites that will keep the images online.
Donning my asbestos suit, I remain affectionately...
- Leigh
Flickr doesn't delete the links. The users do, and that is their choice.
In a sales thread you ask that the seller not post to Picasa fearing it malware, and now you ask no one to post to Flickr. These two sites are two of the (if not the top two) largest, most robust and stable platforms for sharing photos that exist. Flickr is a wonderful online community, provided you find the niches you enjoy there. I've made real-world photography friends that I met through that forum, similar to what happens on this forum at times.
Cross-pollination between the two places is not bad in my book. I actually prefer it when someone posts flickr links here, because then if I like their example, I look at their entire stream, add them as a contact to keep up with them when they post, etc.
Jack Dahlgren
7-Jan-2011, 17:38
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 (http://www.archive.org/about/faqs.php#The_Wayback_Machine) 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.
Oren is completely correct. It is a simple matter to remove content from archive.org or to prevent their crawling of your site. They give instructions on how to do this.
Thinking that the information on the internet is permanent and exhaustive is just wrong.
jim kitchen
8-Jan-2011, 02:07
So do you claim that those posts are still meaningful with the images deleted?
- Leigh
Dear Leigh,
Your are an idiot... :)
jim k
Ramiro Elena
8-Jan-2011, 02:44
Another thing I noticed is other sites don't display a big blank frame saying the image is no longer visible which looks awful (I too get annoyed when this happens, specially with my own photos).
...But I could be wrong.
Dear Leigh,
Your are an idiot... :)
jim k
Cannot boast that many posts as you, still I think such a remark has no place in above discussion, which for the most is civilized and polite, expressing pro and cons in said matter, or perhaps I miss some irony in your remark despite the smiley? After all English is not my first language..
Cor
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 09:03
Cannot boast that many posts as you, still I think such a remark has no place in above discussion, which for the most is civilized and polite, expressing pro and cons in said matter, or perhaps I miss some irony in your remark despite the smiley? After all English is not my first language..
Cor
Sometimes it is an enlightening exercise to click on the "find all posts" button and read through the contributions of various members.
Jim Kitchen, besides being an amazing photographer, is one of this forum's (IMHO) most valuable contributors.
Sometimes it is an enlightening exercise to click on the "find all posts" button and read through the contributions of various members.
Jim Kitchen, besides being an amazing photographer, is one of this forum's (IMHO) most valuable contributors.
That may very well be, John, but does that give him the right to call somebody an idiot? I do not know Leigh but it sounded to not too nice.
I'll shut up now, I'll leave it to the moderators to judge..
Best,
Cor
Oren is completely correct. It is a simple matter to remove content from archive.org or to prevent their crawling of your site. They give instructions on how to do this.
Thinking that the information on the internet is permanent and exhaustive is just wrong.
It is not just wrong, it is also indicative of a complete misunderstanding of its very nature.
But then again, so is the appeal to refrain from cross-referencing one social site on the other...
Dear Leigh,
Your are an idiot... :)
jim k
Hi Jim,
I believe you meant "You are an idiot", not "your are ...".
There are those who would agree with you, but the vast majority would not.
You certainly have a right to your opinion, and to express it.
Have a nice day. ;)
- Leigh
Jim Kitchen, besides being an amazing photographer ...
How are we to know, when he deletes all his images? :confused:
- Leigh
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 11:58
How are we to know, when he deletes all his images? :confused:
- Leigh
He has a website.
He has a website.
Which does not have any of the comments that were posted in the threads.
Nor is there any obvious way to link a photo in a thread to one on his website since he's broken the URL.
- Leigh
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 12:22
That may very well be, John, but does that give him the right to call somebody an idiot? I do not know Leigh but it sounded to not too nice.
I'll shut up now, I'll leave it to the moderators to judge..
Best,
Cor
I don't condone personal attacks, and I've actually called Leigh out for doing it on one of her posts in another thread.
That said, if you are going to dish it out, you should be prepared to take it. Here is a post of hers to Jim earlier in this thread.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=670363&postcount=12
That said, if you are going to dish it out, you should be prepared to take it. Here is a post of hers to Jim earlier in this thread.
And your point is?
The response that you linked was based on his comment which indicated a complete mis-understanding of a simple one-sentence post. He totally ignored the introductory conditional clause of the statement.
And BTW, I'm a he, not a her, though that's not obvious from the name. :cool:
- Leigh
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 12:27
Which does not have any of the comments that were posted in the threads.
Nor is there any obvious way to link a photo in a thread to one on his website since he's broken the URL.
- Leigh
That doesn't bother me. I've learned a lot from reading Jim's posts, both those that have images and those that don't.
Jiri Vasina
8-Jan-2011, 12:58
Oh, common guys... This thread is slipping to personal attacks, hurt personalities, misunderstandings,...
To me both Leigh and Jim Kitchen are great photographers, better than me, from whom I may learn a lot... Leigh has an opinion about missing images referenced, I understand him well, and value his point (although I have stated my point, which is different). Jim's is probably (and I don't want to put words in his mouth) more close to mine... And there are so many other opinions presented by others...
But forums posts are prone to missing or slipping by some of the "body language" and "hidden meaning" and "left-out words" which is so much a part of our communication - even if it's long-distance (over the phone), the tone of voice is important [to clarify the message]. Here in written communication only, you have to be more tolerant, to not get a message that was not meant so...
Let us be more tolerant and less catchy... All of us...
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 13:45
Oh, common guys... This thread is slipping to personal attacks, hurt personalities, misunderstandings,...
But forums posts are prone to missing or slipping by some of the "body language" and "hidden meaning" and "left-out words" which is so much a part of our communication - even if it's long-distance (over the phone), the tone of voice is important [to clarify the message]. Here in written communication only, you have to be more tolerant, to not get a message that was not meant so...
Let us be more tolerant and less catchy... All of us...
Oh, please. In several threads I've read where Leigh has participated, he goads people. It's not an accident; it seems to me to be a pattern of behavior.
Jiri Vasina
8-Jan-2011, 13:58
I have had a bad experience with one of the forum members here in the past - always when I reacted on his posts, or he on mine, we would end up with swords drawn... no way we could talk sensibly...
I have used the forum tools to ignore his posts, so even by chance I did not read them (to stop even the slightest temptation of answering him and again ending in a fight). Now, after a long time, I can even read his posts...
So if you find Leigh's posts to be in similar nature, there's a way... I personally think I can communicate with him rather well...
(and no, Leigh was not the difficult person I am referring to)
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 14:15
I have had a bad experience with one of the forum members here in the past - always when I reacted on his posts, or he on mine, we would end up with swords drawn... no way we could talk sensibly...
I have used the forum tools to ignore his posts, so even by chance I did not read them (to stop even the slightest temptation of answering him and again ending in a fight). Now, after a long time, I can even read his posts...
So if you find Leigh's posts to be in similar nature, there's a way... I personally think I can communicate with him rather well...
(and no, Leigh was not the difficult person I am referring to)
I'm of the opinion that certain people on this forum deserve a degree of respect based on their contributions and skills. I am not one of them, but Jim Kitchen is. There are many others. In my opinion, this community is only as good as it is because of people like Jim. So, I feel the need to take up for those people who are valued and let them know they are valued. And that is the only reason I chimed in on that piece of this thread.
Ramiro Elena
8-Jan-2011, 14:28
Everyone deserves the same degree of respect despite their contribution to the forum. Let's wrap this up. It is embarrassing to see grown ups engage in a never ending discussion that leads nowhere.
There seems to be a few of these lately. This community is too good for this.
Jiri Vasina
8-Jan-2011, 14:46
I'm of the opinion that certain people on this forum deserve a degree of respect based on their contributions and skills. I am not one of them, but Jim Kitchen is. There are many others. In my opinion, this community is only as good as it is because of people like Jim. So, I feel the need to take up for those people who are valued and let them know they are valued. And that is the only reason I chimed in on that piece of this thread.
I completely agree that Jim Kitchen is a great photographer and contributor, and I have a great deal to learn from him. I have said so in this thread already, and also in the past. He certainly deserves respect (he has mine ;) ), as well as others...
John NYC
8-Jan-2011, 14:54
Everyone deserves the same degree of respect despite their contribution to the forum. Let's wrap this up. It is embarrassing to see grown ups engage in a never ending discussion that leads nowhere.
There seems to be a few of these lately. This community is too good for this.
No, I completely disagree with you. One of the reasons this forum is so good is that people who have been here a long time and have great skills are listened to and valued, and the forum polices itself to maintain that. I've seen many others do this in this community on various threads, not just the moderators. And it is one of the things, I believe, that keeps the tenor of the forums what it is -- like a community, with senior members and junior ones (I am the latter) -- and keeps it from falling into the standard disarray of other internet forums.
If this thread tempers the behavior of certain people in goading longstanding valuable members then it is valuable, not embarrassing, and it leads to a better forum not a worse one.
That said, I am not going to respond to this thread anymore as I have more than said my piece.
Sirius Glass
8-Jan-2011, 17:09
Respect is not given, it is earned.
Would the moderators clean out all of these ad hominem posts, please?
Steve
Oh, please. In several threads I've read where Leigh has participated, he goads people. It's not an accident; it seems to me to be a pattern of behavior.
Some people are that way. It only works if you let it.
Rick "who has been goaded himself a few times, and felt foolish when he took the bait" Denney
In several threads I've read where Leigh has participated, he goads people. It's not an accident; it seems to me to be a pattern of behavior.
I must agree to a certain extent. It's certainly not an accident. Neither is it intended to be malicious.
When I disagree with something I'm not reluctant to say so, as some are.
I started this thread as a commentary on something that I find very aggravating, namely missing photos. I and others scan the image threads because we want to see images, to hopefully learn from others more skilled at the art than we. Scanning a thread that had images at one time, but is now reduced to barren text, is a waste of time.
The thread is not about any individual, but about problems as I perceive them. It's certainly not about Jim Kitchen. I don't know him from stewed tomatoes. He might be the greatest photographer since Ansel Adams for all I know.
I agree that ad hominem attacks are inappropriate, and I apologize for mine. I do have a short fuse, and some folks know how to light it. :rolleyes:
Thanks.
- Leigh
re: "I do have a short fuse, and some folks know how to light it."
Then there are those that spontaniously combust.
Matus Kalisky
10-Jan-2011, 08:08
I would dare to actually post to the original topic of this thread: most of the time when I submit an image here - I do it via Flickr. Why? I have already worked on an image that looks OK on the web. Now if I want to upload it here - I have to resize it again and check the size. If this webpage would run (it does not have to so I do not care too much) an engine that would take the uploaded photo and resize is if too large - it would be fine too. I am just too lazy to do it every time. And Flickr offers easy way to attach an image in different sizes.
Actually - if I am posting some image that is related to some technical issue - I try to upload directly as than it really stays there and uploading it to Flickr takes the same work. But if it is already on Flickr, I am usually too lazy.
But the point is - is does not matter all that much. Most pictures uploaded or attached in the forums are about pictures themselves and it is no big loss if they are missing. Certainly true for mine.
goamules
10-Jan-2011, 12:31
I think this picture sums up what I have to say about this topic:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5340770081_c564924ab7_m.jpg
SocalAstro
10-Jan-2011, 12:55
Love this one; thanks for sharing. I feel bad for folks reading this post in the future as the picture may not be available :-)
-Leon
I think this picture sums up what I have to say about this topic:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5340770081_c564924ab7_m.jpg
Scott Walker
10-Jan-2011, 13:24
I think this picture sums up what I have to say about this topic:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5084/5340770081_c564924ab7_m.jpg
Well put
Matus Kalisky
10-Jan-2011, 13:46
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv245/slnce-z-gsi/misc/photo_unavailable_flickr.jpg
---
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv245/slnce-z-gsi/misc/photo_unavailable_flickr_2.jpg
:p
sanchi heuser
18-Jan-2011, 21:37
I started to upoad photos on flickr.
How can I put some of these photos here into a thread?
Andi
Click on the Post Reply button to open the editing window.
On that page, scroll down to the box labeled Additional Options. The second section is labeled Attach Files. Click on the Manage Attachment button to add your photos.
Note that there are some file size limitations as shown on that page. Use the Browse button to find the image files on your computer.
- Leigh
sanchi heuser
19-Jan-2011, 13:59
Thanks Leigh,
sounds easy.
And for uploading the photos from flickr I have to write the URL
into the field 'Upload file from URL' I guess?
flickr shows the photo in different sizes. How can I chose one?
Do they have different URL's, for each size of the same photo another one?
Andi
And for uploading the photos from flickr I have to write the URL into the field 'Upload file from URL' I guess?
Yes, you have to copy the full URL into the source name field.
flickr shows the photo in different sizes. How can I chose one? Do they have different URL's, for each size of the same photo another one?
I believe there's a slight difference in the file name for each different size. But I've never posted anything to that site, so I'm not sure.
- Leigh
Ben Syverson
19-Jan-2011, 15:55
That's the hard way to do it... To post an image from flickr here, just go the image on Flickr, go to the "Share this" dropdown, select "Grab the HTML/BBCode," select the size you want from the size menu, and change the radio button to BBCode.
If you upload the photo as an attachment here, you're restricted to 650x650 pixels, and it shows up as a thumbnail until you click on it. By using the BBCode, you can post even larger images inline.
sanchi heuser
20-Jan-2011, 07:51
@Leigh,
thanks a lot.
Your thread lead me to the idea to upload on flickr and
link the picture to the forum.
@Ben,
Thank you so much for your help.
It worked!
I've justed posted a pic in the urban landscape thread.
And I don't edit it with Picnik or replace it, for it will stay visible here.
Andi
Cornelius
21-Jan-2011, 00:54
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.
Frank has a good point here. I usually try to find any info on my own accord as I'm sure forum members get tired of answering the same questions repeatedly, but often this isn't possible. I end up reading through 20, fifteen page threads, and never end up answering my question. I will post the question, but sometimes I can tell people don't want to be bothered with my rookie post, so please try to pay attention to how you initially title your thread as it will save us all time in the future. :)
@Leigh,
thanks a lot.
Your thread lead me to the idea to upload on flickr and
link the picture to the forum.
Andi
har har har!
ironic. :)
Robert Hughes
21-Jan-2011, 13:11
So... if you have Petzval shots - on Flicker - what do you do?
Scott --
21-Jan-2011, 15:35
FWIW, I switched from posting primarily from photobucket to flickr as several people I know, whose opinions and input I value, are blocked from photobucket at their places of work. I may switch back to photobucket at some point in the future, but I'm enjoying the benefits from a flickr upgrade that I can see extending it in the future. Photobucket seems, though, more archival in the way I use such things.
So there ya go.
sanchi heuser
21-Jan-2011, 17:11
har har har!
ironic. :)
Yes, there's some irony in it.
Do a good turn daily...
ZapoTeX
16-Aug-2011, 13:38
Hi guys, I did a benchmark comparison of Flickr, Photobucket, Imageshack and (just because it's famous) Picasa, just from the perspective of using it in forums.
http://nettedthoughts.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/image-hosting-benchmark-and-improvement-potential/ (http://nettedthoughts.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/image-hosting-benchmark-and-improvement-potential/)
I know this is kind of spam/self promotion, but it is highly relevant to the topic of this discussion. Sorry if I violated any rule.
Ciao!
Good summary.
Personally, I use Flickr, Picasa and TinyPic.
Interface is easiest with TinyPic, don't like Flickr's at all, but Flickr has slightly better picture quality.
akfreak
16-Aug-2011, 15:17
I like Flickr because I can upload .tiff and all if the nice features
jasongraaf
16-Aug-2011, 15:34
Flickr doesn't re-size large photos (assuming you pay). Also, they do display the exif data on the photo's Flickr page.
The image not available happens when the user re-uploads the photo and doesn't change the link in their post.
Asher Kelman
16-Aug-2011, 20:22
Hi guys, I did a benchmark comparison of Flickr, Photobucket, Imageshack and (just because it's famous) Picasa, just from the perspective of using it in forums.
http://nettedthoughts.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/image-hosting-benchmark-and-improvement-potential/ (http://nettedthoughts.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/image-hosting-benchmark-and-improvement-potential/)
I know this is kind of spam/self promotion, but it is highly relevant to the topic of this discussion. Sorry if I violated any rule.
Ciao!
Useful reference!
Thanks for sharing!
ZapoTeX
17-Aug-2011, 10:35
Flickr doesn't re-size large photos (assuming you pay). Also, they do display the exif data on the photo's Flickr page.
Thanks for clarifying this! For resizing: I meant the FREE services, I'll clarify that in the blog.
For the exif data: yes, they do display it, but if I try to retrieve it from the image, they're not available. And if you post the image on a forum, you usually just use and EXIF viewer plug-in for your browser, you don't go to the page. I'll calrify this as well.
All: glad you liked it!
Thanks for your comments!
The exif data is an option for the user. Only the full size shows exif when viewed on a forum. So upload the size you wish to display on forums so people can right click it and use their firefox plugin to view exif data. In other words, don't post the medium or large size on a forum but the original as it's the only one with exif.
At least, that's how it was with my plugin. Jeffrey's Exif view seems to be able to see it on all sizes:
http://regex.info/exif.cgi
Edit: The original size retains camera exif the other sizes do not. The other sizes retain the Photoshop information though.
Carterofmars
17-Aug-2011, 17:28
This is the inherent danger of technology. There is less permanence than print. eBooks, web pages, all can disappear tomorrow. A physical book or magazine can lie around for decades, centuries.
Robert Hughes
18-Aug-2011, 06:37
I put up a microscope manual (at great effort in scanning and retyping) that, after 5 years, disappeared without a trace one day. And I'd lost the backups, of course. Bummer.
richardhkirkando
18-Aug-2011, 12:22
I'm not sure I understand the request in this thread....don't post photos on flickr because they won't show up if you delete them later? Why would that be any different from any other host?
David R Munson
19-Aug-2011, 08:00
Some people like to complain and warn about dangers that aren't necessarily actually there. Not that Leigh's concerns aren't valid, necessarily, but in my opinion overblown and not really worth a thread all on their own. Unless you have a server of your own (with all the various backups and redundancies) where you host your own images and intend to do so in perpetuity, flickr seems like a pretty good bet to me.
Kirk Gittings
19-Aug-2011, 08:02
;)
I'm not sure I understand the request in this thread....don't post photos on flickr because they won't show up if you delete them later?
ericantonio
22-Aug-2011, 07:32
Flickr is blocked in most work environments. I just have to wait to go home and see them. Just a slight inconvenience.
Flickr is blocked in most work environments. I just have to wait to go home and see them. Just a slight inconvenience.
Flickr is one of the only image hosting websites I can see at work. So :p :p :p.
I Am Luna
22-Aug-2011, 15:49
Why would Flickr be blocked? Doesn't people's employment want them viewing the latest uploads from their contacts?
Why would Flickr be blocked? Doesn't people's employment want them viewing the latest uploads from their contacts?
:D I can see Flickr but can't upload to it. I also can't see any other image hosting websites. Personal storage/backup is the reason.
Flickr is blocked in most work environments. I just have to wait to go home and see them. Just a slight inconvenience.
Time for that iPad...
Wayne Crider
23-Aug-2011, 19:05
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv245/slnce-z-gsi/misc/photo_unavailable_flickr.jpg
---
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv245/slnce-z-gsi/misc/photo_unavailable_flickr_2.jpg
:p
I'm getting the feeling that there could soon be a Flickr thread of unavailable pictures.
Wayne Crider
23-Aug-2011, 19:23
I'll say that I know what Leigh means about the missing pictures. You'll read the remarks from others about how great the picture is and then, it's been deleted,:confused: and you don't get the see what was so nice that 6 or 7 people commented on it. Oh well. I do enjoy J. Kitchen's pic's among others and I would hope they'd last a little longer but then I understand his point of view. Too bad there wasn't a way that a deleted pic would delete the post and all relating posts as well; I can see the point about context. Maybe a link to the website would suffice for us late the the thread readers.
Ramiro Elena
23-Aug-2011, 23:44
To me, the solution is being able to fix the link here in LFPF. I'd fix my links if I could edit.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.