migrating flickr photos to google+?

maddoc said:
Doesn't one give up exclusive rights on own images when uploading to google plus (similar to Facebook and twitter) ?
Click to expand...
No. It is for Google's protection. Every photo sharing or social networking site/company/service has something, if not similar, like it.
Of course this gets turned around when people fear their entire collection might be in jeopardy and mob panic, due to the blogsphere, start to amp up the fear in people.
 
I am staying with Flickr.

I would like something better (not that its bad - just a bit restrictive in some senses such as layout options and ability to customise interface.) But am not willing to give up the good aspects of Flickr. I like the ability to find lots of photos easily - helps learn new styles and techniques.

I had a quick look at Google+ and came away a bit befuddled. I am sure its more simple than presented but whoever developed the presentation on the web page to expalin how it works wants a lesson in communicating.

I can see they are trying to make it kinda facebooky but honestly if there is one thing that would turn me off the site for good, its that. I hate the whole facebook thing. For me this is NOT about social networking - its about photography.

I am happy to comment on peoples photos and have them comment on mine (thats a big attractionin fact) but I seriously do not want a bunch of strangers contacting me to "stay in touch". I pulled out of Facebook for this reason, especially when I realised that 45% of people who contact me socially, I did not want to know. Another 45% wanted to contact me for business reasons (and I did not want to know them either) leaving 10% at best as people I was happy to link to.

Oh by the way. And I hate the "groovy" mind mappy interface with boring names like circles and sparks. A marketing managers wet dream!
 
Last edited:
hteasley said:
That's a scary article, if you don't know what the TOS really means. Same with Dropbox, Flickr, and other sites. They need these rights in order to let anyone see your pictures. To show someone your pictures, they need to create various different sized images (derivative works), permit them to move from server to server (distribute), grant these rights to their partners (Dropbox is hosted by Amazon, for instance, so Amazon needs to have the right to host your photos), etc.

It sounds scary, but these are the rights they need in order to merely function as they tell you they function.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you, except the syndicated services paragraphs seems to go beyond that:

“You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.”
 
I'm trying to work it out but you can only look at your own and your contacts photos on G+? If so, as an open photo site it's quite useless even if it looks pretty.
 
Neare said:
I'm trying to work it out but you can only look at your own and your contacts photos on G+? If so, as an open photo site it's quite useless even if it looks pretty.
Click to expand...

Your're right. I find a lot of good stuff while surfing some interesting groups. Groups are such a nice way to find things in this pile of millions of photos.
 
I think the google+ interface for photos is a bit tacky. Looks more like a teenagers bedroom wall than a portfolio. It's great for sharing stuff with friends but I definitely wouldn't use it to show my work to potential clients.

ALSO, no one bothered to mention the stats on the flickr pro account. It's really helpful seeing who's linking to my images and where my referrals are coming from. Definitely something google+ doesn't offer.
 
Last edited:
I just make everything public on Google+, so that anyone can see it. And my "stream" is only made up of people in my circles.

I have just one circle, called "everybody."

I like the layout, but I'm keeping flickr pro, I decided...
 
mabelsound said:
Sure--here's the "Best of 2010" gallery I just posted.
https://plus.google.com/photos/117208918921043466005/albums/5640759395279548657

I have been using G+ very differently from, say, facebook. facebook I use to keep in touch with friends and family, period--I don't friend anyone whom I don't actually know. Whereas G+ I am keeping public--using it as kind of a microblog or enhanced version of twitter. It's an open forum on the work I and my peers do. (I mostly post about literature and writing.) And it's nice to think I could integrate my photography with that. Anyway, we'll see how it goes.
Click to expand...

But there is a big difference in the basic design of Twitter and Flickr and Google plus. In twitter say if someone likes your feed, they follow you and get your future feeds in their homepage, same with Flickr, but G+ is designed in a way that people cannot follow you, you would have to proactively share your feed with the people, by adding them in circle, for them to see what you have been posting. It is good when you want to share private stuff with known people but it does not seem to be the platform to share content to an unknown, larger audience.
 
avikrc said:
But there is a big difference in the basic design of Twitter and Flickr and Google plus. In twitter say if someone likes your feed, they follow you and get your future feeds in their homepage, same with Flickr, but G+ is designed in a way that people cannot follow you, you would have to proactively share your feed with the people, by adding them in circle, for them to see what you have been posting. It is good when you want to share private stuff with known people but it does not seem to be the platform to share content to an unknown, larger audience.
Click to expand...

No, anyone can follow you if you make your posts public--you can configure it so it's very much like twitter with long posts and comments. You can see my photos at that link, right?

And if you are on G+, you can add me to your circles even if we don't know each other, and you'll see my posts.
 
Hi,

No what I meant here is, even though I see your images through that link, if I add you to my circles you see what I post not the other way around.

You will have to add me to your circles for me to get what you are posting even if they are public.
 
avikrc said:
Hi,

No what I meant here is, even though I see your images through that link, if I add you to my circles you see what I post not the other way around.

You will have to add me to your circles for me to get what you are posting even if they are public.
Click to expand...

No, that's not true--all my posts are confugired to be public. Here:
https://plus.google.com/117208918921043466005/posts

You can see that even if you're not signed into, or even signed up for, G+.
 
mabelsound said:
No, that's not true--all my posts are confugired to be public. Here:
https://plus.google.com/117208918921043466005/posts

You can see that even if you're not signed into, or even signed up for, G+.
Click to expand...

yea sure you have configured your posts to be public and I can see them in your page, but I wont get your feed on my page unless you add me to your circles right? I still have to bookmark your page and go there periodically to check if you have posted something. That's pretty inconvenient :p :p
 
All you need to do is add me to your circles to put me on your feed. I don't have to add you. I could be wrong, though--go ahead and add me and see what happens.
 
mabelsound said:
All you need to do is add me to your circles to put me on your feed. I don't have to add you. I could be wrong, though--go ahead and add me and see what happens.
Click to expand...

No I think what was trying to be said is that I can only see your photos if I actually know you exist in the first place. You can't just "browse" other peoples photos (who you don't know) at random so you can't discover new photographers or works through G+. Like all that social media stuff, only your 'friends' can see your stuff, not the general public.

Whereas flickr has things like groups, tags and explore etc.

On another note, I think that the photo display layout looks really bad. It's overally cluttered, gimmicky and is definitely not how I would choose to display my work.
It's designed for photos of friends and family, not portfolios.
 
So far none of what I've seen made me want to rush out and switch from flickr.
I like the amount of control that I have over my pictures on flickr.

But.. I'm not opposed to give it a try.
So how does one try out this G+ thing?
Is it by invitation? I have multiple gmail account already.
 
shadowfox, email me, jrobertlennon at gmail, I'll invite you.

I do agree that it isn't a substitute for flickr, but I'm happy it's there as a kind of best-of instant-gallery thing. I find the layout quite appealing actually. Doesn't seem "pro" but it is snappy and fills the screen with images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom