Alternatives to flickr?

[antiquark]

Flickr recently changed their layout. It looks like crap compared to the old one, and it isn't compatible with old browsers.

The annoying thing is, they asked for critiques during the preview phase. But, in the end they said "yeah, thanks for your comments, we're doing it how we planned from the beginning." So basically they ignored the advice they asked for. Typical of a big company. "Who gives a damn what the actual users think? The marketing department knows better!"

A google search for "alternatives to flickr" returns many results. Does anyone here use any of these alternatives, and have any comments?

Thanks,
Derek.

 

[user237428934]

So basically they ignored the advice they asked for.

How do you know about the feedback of other users? I like the new layout.

 

[maddoc]

I noticed the same today and so far I am undecided about like or not like ... The alternative for me is pBase, they have had lots of hardware troubles in the past and non-existing communication with the user but I like system with css style sheets and galleries better.

 

[user237428934]

You need an alternative. For what exactly? What did you use the most? Is the alternative probably a personal homepage?

 

[antiquark]

How do you know about the feedback of other users? I like the new layout.

They had a feedback group:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/newphotopagepreview/

A few things that came up repeatedly:
- non-friends can now download you large images.
- the tags are in a run-on sentence, instead of a column.
- not compatible with older browsers.
- title is below picture, not above.

 

[Darkhorse]

smugmug perhaps?

 

[antiquark]

You need an alternative. For what exactly? What did you use the most? Is the alternative probably a personal homepage?

The feature I use most in flickr is the tagging, so I can make my images searchable. I have a personal page based on pixelpost, but I'm continually having software problems with it, and the tagging is basically nonexistent.

Also I like the ability to arrange things into sets, but that's secondary. Tagging for searchability is the main thing.

 

[shadowfox]

In respond to antiquark's post:

A few things that came up repeatedly:
- non-friends can now download you large images.

How? I can't download photos whose owner don't allow me to download it, just the same as before.

- the tags are in a run-on sentence, instead of a column.

Most tags nowadays are in a sentence, easier to copy, for example when you want to search it.

- not compatible with older browsers.

Most progress are not compatible with older things. It's just the way things work.

- title is below picture, not above.

This, I can relate, though I don't know if I can't live with it.

 

[Disaster_Area]

Flickr's new look is different, but I'll get used to it.. the single greatest thing they did was allow me to add a pic to groups by checking them off all at the same time instead of having to add them one at a time with an annoying confirmation box after each one.

You'll get used to the new look... every time Facebook changes it's layout everyone bitches and says "This sucks, I'm quitting"... but no one ever quits because as annoying as the interface gets it does a job no one else does nearly as well... same goes for Flickr. I still get more business and more advertising through the flickr community than I'd get anywhere else. The interface would have to get seriously crappy to outweigh the benefits of flickr.

 

[antiquark]

How? I can't download photos whose owner don't allow me to download it, just the same as before.

Looks like they fixed it, that's good. 🙂

Most progress are not compatible with older things. It's just the way things work.

Usually companies at least make an effort to have backwards compatibility. The browser I'm stuck with at work isn't compatible, and it's only 12 months old. (Seamonkey 1.1.17).

Not sure why the new interface irritates me... it shouldn't really, it's sort of a trivial thing to worry about. Maybe because of flickr's attitude, "here it is, live with it." Also, billion dollar companies should have the capability to make a page work with an older browser. When they say they can't, well, they're just lying!

 

[back alley]

that zenfolio looks nice...

 

[easyrider]

I mainly use Smugmug. Have been there for two years and pix look good. I also have a Flickr page but find that the images are not as well displayed.

 

[tbarker13]

Maybe what they mean to say is that they don't have the time/staff to make their new interface work with every browser under the sun. Obviously they are going to work hard to make sure it works with the most popular browsers.
But really, once you get beyond the heavweights (Internet Explorer and Firefox) and the also-rans (Chrome, Opera and Safari), you're dealing with some pretty small numbers of people using those other browsers.

I'm not terribly thrilled with the new interface myself, but then I admit that I usually reject change. I get annoyed every time Facebook makes another modification of its interface.
Unfortunately, this just seems to be a part of life on the Internet. I doubt you can find anyplace else to post your photos where you'll be free of such "improvements."

 

[filmfan]

I think you are overreacting...

 

[Fujitsu]

Got to say I like the new look because photos show larger now by default. Wish they would have an option to turn all the crap on the right side off (geo tags, etc.).

As to alternatives, I think flickr is #1. You could always host your images at any other place but if you want to be found, I recommend flickr.

 

[Brian Puccio]

I was always a big fan of roll your own so you could control every detail, but that means you think it's worth the time to throw something together or modify a prebuilt gallery program. Of course, you can't throw together the community aspect of it all.

 

[back alley]

Got to say I like the new look because photos show larger now by default. Wish they would have an option to turn all the crap on the right side off (geo tags, etc.).

As to alternatives, I think flickr is #1. You could always host your images at any other place but if you want to be found, I recommend flickr.

i haven't been found yet....:bang:

 

[btgc]

Before now, I have noticed people hosted versions "on black background" of their images somewhere alse and added link "view on black" under picture. Now it's home-brewed feature.

Compatibility? On internet? Browsers? This topic is too funny to even touch it.

 

[Disaster_Area]

The one feature they haven't added that I've been dying for is to be able to add multiple tags to multiple shots at once by picking from a list of my existing tags.

 

[maggieo]

+1. The map for the location is great. Keyboard short cuts. Bigger image size to 600px. Better navigation within sets, groups and favorites. More favorites available per page. Huge improvement.

Flickr's new look is different, but I'll get used to it.. the single greatest thing they did was allow me to add a pic to groups by checking them off all at the same time instead of having to add them one at a time with an annoying confirmation box after each one.

You'll get used to the new look... every time Facebook changes it's layout everyone bitches and says "This sucks, I'm quitting"... but no one ever quits because as annoying as the interface gets it does a job no one else does nearly as well... same goes for Flickr. I still get more business and more advertising through the flickr community than I'd get anywhere else. The interface would have to get seriously crappy to outweigh the benefits of flickr.

Got to say I like the new look because photos show larger now by default. Wish they would have an option to turn all the crap on the right side off (geo tags, etc.).

As to alternatives, I think flickr is #1. You could always host your images at any other place but if you want to be found, I recommend flickr.

I'm in agreement with all of these, but they have made it more difficult to generate bbcode markup for posting photos and links in phpbb forums like the RFF.