Alternatives to Flickr

[Gabriel M.A.]

Interesting, this pixel talk. Ahem.
But, anybody got any good alternatives for Flickr?

500px.com

I'm going to migrate all my stuff there soon. I've had a 500px account for a few years now. They'll be good until Facebook, Yahoo, Google or some other big-appetite corporation chews it up and spits it out.

 

[Roger Hicks]

500px.com

I'm going to migrate all my stuff there soon. I've had a 500px account for a few years now. They'll be good until Facebook, Yahoo, Google or some other big-appetite corporation chews it up and spits it out.

Spits? You're sure you didn't mis-type 'p' for 'h'?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Matus]

I use Zenfolio, but added pro Flickr in April, hoping for greater visibility. But I really dislike the new design, especially what they've done with collections. I'll likely not stay.
John

I am moving the other way - just recently got the 'basic' Zenfolio account (which still needs a lot of work) ($25 per year) and will be moving the 'better' stuff from Flidkr there. I will not renew my 'pro' account on Flickr - not worth $50 to me.

Zenfolio goes in different direction than Flickr, but in my opinion offers much more for the money and they have very good support.

 

[ChrisLivsey]

500px.com

I'm going to migrate all my stuff there soon.

Is that straightforward?
Can you stream it across or is going to need a download and upload?

 

[Sparrow]

500px.com

I'm going to migrate all my stuff there soon. I've had a 500px account for a few years now. They'll be good until Facebook, Yahoo, Google or some other big-appetite corporation chews it up and spits it out.

Is that straightforward?
Can you stream it across or is going to need a download and upload?

... yes, please tell? ... and can we ask for a tutorial on the exact process?



Roger; its spelled ****e btw ... as in spiteful 🙂

 

[Murchu]

I don't take photography casually and I upload everything at the highest resolution possible. Why would you want to hold back any available detail?

Image theft perhaps..

 

[Murchu]

500px.com

I'm going to migrate all my stuff there soon. I've had a 500px account for a few years now. They'll be good until Facebook, Yahoo, Google or some other big-appetite corporation chews it up and spits it out.

500px is nice, only thing I must admit I don't like is how all image thumbnails are square.

 

[willie_901]

I'm not a professional either but photo theft happened to me several times and it was very unpleasant.

I see flickr as a photo sharing platform, so uploading light web-sized-saved copies of the original files makes sense.

Upload two copies, full sized with permissions to be viewable only by you and as small as you like or public viewers.

The full sized, invisible to the public versions are off-site back ups in case you loose your on-site originals and backups for any number of unpleasant reasons.

 

[alistair.o]

Re: 500px.com

It's in the small print:

"...you are granting 500px a worldwide, Non exclusive license to use the content and are representing and warranting to 500px That the content is owned or duly licensed by you, and that 500px is free to publish, Distribute and use the content as hereinafter provided for without obtaining permission Or license from any third party.

1. By posting Content to the Site you hereby grant to 500px a non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content in connection with the Services. This license will exist for the period during which the Content is posted on the Site and will automatically terminate upon the removal of the Content from the Site;
2. The license granted to 500px includes the right to use your Content fully or partially for promotional reasons and to distribute and redistribute your Content to other parties, web-sites, applications, and other entities,..."

Give away what you've worked hard at to achieve? Why?

 

[user237428934]

Re: 500px.com

It's in the small print:

"...you are granting 500px a worldwide, Non exclusive license to use the content and are representing and warranting to 500px That the content is owned or duly licensed by you, and that 500px is free to publish, Distribute and use the content as hereinafter provided for without obtaining permission Or license from any third party.

1. By posting Content to the Site you hereby grant to 500px a non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content in connection with the Services. This license will exist for the period during which the Content is posted on the Site and will automatically terminate upon the removal of the Content from the Site;
2. The license granted to 500px includes the right to use your Content fully or partially for promotional reasons and to distribute and redistribute your Content to other parties, web-sites, applications, and other entities,..."

Give away what you've worked hard at to achieve? Why?

Without the first part they would not even be allowed to store your photos, render the smaller thumbnails and show it to other persons visiting the website. This is standard for all uploaded content on such sites.

I'm no lawyer but the 2nd part sounds like the standard phrase so that 3rd party websites or applications can use content over some kind of API.

Of course the website hoster is allowed to use the photos for it's own advertising purposes or for partner companies. But that does not give them the right to sell your stuff.

 

[S.H.]

ipernity looks nice and clean to me, I'm currently debating to migrate.

 

[ChrisN]

Re: 500px.com

It's in the small print:

"...you are granting 500px a worldwide, Non exclusive license to use the content and are representing and warranting to 500px That the content is owned or duly licensed by you, and that 500px is free to publish, Distribute and use the content as hereinafter provided for without obtaining permission Or license from any third party.

1. By posting Content to the Site you hereby grant to 500px a non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content in connection with the Services. This license will exist for the period during which the Content is posted on the Site and will automatically terminate upon the removal of the Content from the Site;
2. The license granted to 500px includes the right to use your Content fully or partially for promotional reasons and to distribute and redistribute your Content to other parties, web-sites, applications, and other entities,..."

Give away what you've worked hard at to achieve? Why?

Without the first part they would not even be allowed to store your photos, render the smaller thumbnails and show it to other persons visiting the website. This is standard for all uploaded content on such sites.

I'm no lawyer but the 2nd part sounds like the standard phrase so that 3rd party websites or applications can use content over some kind of API.

Of course the website hoster is allowed to use the photos for it's own advertising purposes or for partner companies. But that does not give them the right to sell your stuff.

Comparing that with the Flickr TOS (below), I think the Flickr TOS gives me more confidence that they are not setting out to use my images commercially.




9. CONTENT SUBMITTED OR MADE AVAILABLE FOR INCLUSION ON THE YAHOO! SERVICES

Yahoo! does not claim ownership of Content you submit or make available for inclusion on the Yahoo! Services. However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:

a. With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific Yahoo! Group to which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo! Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Yahoo! Services.

b. With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo! Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Yahoo! Services.

 

[Murchu]

ipernity looks nice and clean to me, I'm currently debating to migrate.

Interesting site, had never heard of it before. Looks like a stream lined version of Flickr to me.

 

[S.H.]

Interesting site, had never heard of it before. Looks like a stream lined version of Flickr to me.

Exactly! I find it very pleasing, low key, same functionality than the old Flickr but somehow better made. I'm really thinking about making the switch.

And you can transfer your pictures from Flickr to ipernity : http://www.ipernity.com/apps/gm

 

[Sparrow]

I'm looking at 500px at the moment ... I prefer white backgrounds, and also links directly to flickr

I was thinking of just leaving my Flickr as a zombie account to keep all the links active

 

[user237428934]

Comparing that with the Flickr TOS (below), I think the Flickr TOS gives me more confidence that they are not setting out to use my images commercially.

I agree with that.

 

[user237428934]

If people want single photos with lots of text then they probably should not look at another photo hosting site but instead go for a blog like tumblr or wordpress.

There you can upload photos and but lot's of text around them.

 

[cz23]

ipernity looks nice and clean to me, I'm currently debating to migrate.

That has the cleanness I always wished Flickr had. Thanks for the link.

John

 

[paradoxbox]

This is such a disaster for the online photographic community.


Flickr had a monopoly on almost all serious photographers who were active on the internet. If you wanted to research about a kind of film, or a lens type, or a camera type, you could just search around on flickr and find photographic examples of what you were looking for.

If you wanted a place to store and use as a host, you could just upload your photos to flickr and people would randomly find and sometimes order your photographs.

Now all of that is gone.

This is the biggest blow to photography in the last several years IMO. Yahoo has killed flickr and they won't change it back.

 

[andersju]

Now all of that is gone.

How is all of that gone? Nothing is gone, as far as I can tell, it just looks a bit different.