Switch to English Language Passer en langue franÁaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,497   Posts: 1,543,058   Online: 871
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54
  1. #21
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Thanks for your views. I really don't think I have a problem "getting" flickr, there's no reason not to have a platform which absolutely everyone can use to display images, but it was mostly the spectacular disregard for the principle of copyright and credit-giving that disturbed me! I think the site would be stronger if all the pictures shown were actually authored by the person posting them.

    Regards,

    David

  2. #22
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,092
    Images
    56
    I wonder if it was my reference to Flickr in the now-dead "Mature Audience" thread that prompted your OP?

    Regardless, I don't stay current with my account - although I probably should.

    I've used it at the most basic level - an on-line photo albumn that I can "share" with others. I've never gotten into the group thing etc. but that is an interesting feature.

    BTW, I first learned of Flickr when a friend posted her vacation shots and then e-mailed the link for viewing. I think that's a common way that folks learn about the site.

    It certainly would be an "alternative Gallery".

  3. #23
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    The more I look at flickr, the more confused I get!

    For example, there is something called a "pro" account (apparently this offers more facilities). On the other hand, there seems to be no facility on individuals' pages for interested parties to make contact, indeed the terms of use include the following:
    <<Donít use Flickr for commercial purposes.
    Flickr is for personal use only. If we find you selling products, services, or yourself through your photostream, we will terminate your account. ...>>

    To take an example - I find a lady using the name Zsaj, who has posted over 2,000 pictures. She says she is a librarian and former graphic designer, her work includes some so-so snapshots but I find it generally good, with several dozen superb and impeccable images. I ask myself - what is she getting out of flickr? Sure, a way of getting work seen, but ...

    The purpose of APUG is not primarily commercial, but it does include a facility for buying/selling equipment and one for PMs if users want to do any other deals. I guess I am just surprised that someone should have the talent of the above-mentioned lady, and put the effort into creating a large body of work as she has done, and then essentially give it away!

  4. #24
    copake_ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NYC or Copake or Tucson
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4,092
    Images
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington View Post
    The more I look at flickr, the more confused I get!

    For example, there is something called a "pro" account (apparently this offers more facilities). On the other hand, there seems to be no facility on individuals' pages for interested parties to make contact, indeed the terms of use include the following:
    <<Donít use Flickr for commercial purposes.
    Flickr is for personal use only. If we find you selling products, services, or yourself through your photostream, we will terminate your account. ...>>

    To take an example - I find a lady using the name Zsaj, who has posted over 2,000 pictures. She says she is a librarian and former graphic designer, her work includes some so-so snapshots but I find it generally good, with several dozen superb and impeccable images. I ask myself - what is she getting out of flickr? Sure, a way of getting work seen, but ...

    The purpose of APUG is not primarily commercial, but it does include a facility for buying/selling equipment and one for PMs if users want to do any other deals. I guess I am just surprised that someone should have the talent of the above-mentioned lady, and put the effort into creating a large body of work as she has done, and then essentially give it away!
    David,

    I think they are using "pro" in the way one might say "expert" which is another way of saying "subscriber" which is a way of saying that if you pay some money you get more services.

    The site is "for profit" - although I'm not sure it actually makes any money. It belongs to one of the "biggies" - be it MS, Yahoo or Google etc. I really don't remember.

    Someone else here will have more info on that.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Yahoo.

    As far as why give your work away... I'm not saying mine is of that quality, but I essentially give my work away on flickr and elsewhere just so *somebody* can see it. I've never made a penny on photography...

  6. #26
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Thanks once again for all the views. I think I'll close with this thought: A quick strum of my desk calculator reveals that 2,000 uploads a minute translates to 120,000 an hour, 2,880,000 per day, 86,400,000 per 30-day month ... How long before the whole thing simply implodes under the sheer weight of images?

    Regards,

    David

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    284
    David,

    86 million photos is less than 350TB (86,400,000 * 4MB per file = 329 TB). That costs Yahoo about $500,000 to setup and install. There are ongoing costs for electricity, maintenance, etc. Of course, this is a high-end number. Most of their images are nowhere near 4MB per file.

    They have about 2,089,291,619 pictures which have been uploaded. Theoretically some of these are deleted but it is probably a very small percentage. At 4MB each (which I think is a bit high), that's about 8 petabytes of disk. You can buy a 1 petabyte array (which is fully redundant with all the whiz-bang features) for $4 million. $64 million buys you the current storage capacity of Flickr.

    At $25 a year for a 'pro' account, they only need 640,000 users to cover their immediate costs to purchase more disk. They probably have three times that many people paying. Plus they have other revenue streams.

    I love Flickr. It is easy to use. Easy to connect with other people. Easy to share photos. And it acts as an archive of original resolution scans in case my own backups fail. Just like the Internet at large, no one is 'in charge' and there is no 'editor'. It's just a glorious mash-up of human expression.

    If Flickr worries you, I wonder, have you ever used Wikipedia?

  8. #28
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by amuderick View Post

    If Flickr worries you, I wonder, have you ever used Wikipedia?
    It wasn't actually the problem of server capacity that bothered me - as you illustrate, the costs are manageable - what I doubt is the ability of any user to find anything among the 2.1 trillion images except on a totally random "lucky dip" basis. I would suspect in practice that many people will avail themselves of shortcuts like "Today's (or this week's, or this month's) new pictures" - even a minute's worth is far more than anyone could look at who does not live in front of a computer 24/7. If they offered hit counters for individual pages, I would bet that the number of hits would be at a maximum right after posting and would then fall to a very low figure very soon! Wikipedia is different, people come to it with a definite search intention rather than just to see if any new interesting stuff has appeared!

    Regards,

    David

  9. #29
    delphine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London (UK)
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    628
    Images
    13
    I very much understand David's feel.

    At the begining I found flickr visually "busy", I was not too sure who's photos I was looking at, and navigating within one group, it is easy to find yourself in another one. I was mislead by the "pro" terminology too, as I did not realize that it meant merely subscriber.
    Also, there is so much, you don't want to find yourself browsing through an endless sheer volume of material.

    Probably I did not use it enough, and certainly I did not search it well.

    However, as it was pointed out to me in a separate thread, I searched the groups with a couple of keywords. Within minutes, I found myself browsing through an endless list of photography groups which I pre-selected as I went along as as way to bookmark them:
    Portraiture Photography//Portrait//Ilford//Medium Format//London by Londoners//London Photographers//120//Man in The White Suit:Film Photos, UK!//Analog Photography//London Independent photography//East London//London Holga Group//

    I noticed that some of them have discussion threads, which opens up the possibility for social networks.

    The way I view it, flickr can require perseverance, but it is certainly an effective sharing tool (no more no less than that) and it offers great coverage and network capabilities via the meta tags, look-up and references.
    Certainly not limited to grannies photos, nor to be looked down at by film photographers.

  10. #30
    Akki14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,873
    Images
    210
    I think the disregard for copyright is something you'll find most "normal"/"averagejoe" people disregard too. It's like copying tapes or tracks to give to your friends or showing cutout magazine articles to a friend. The average joe doesn't see putting stuff on the web as publishing, as such, and have never given a toss about citation. It happens. A lot. Sorry to pop your bubble.
    ~Heather
    oooh shiny!
    http://www.stargazy.org/

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  ó   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin