Flickr. Am I the only one who likes it?

I really have no idea what you mean with any of this (apart from the direct personal insults which you were so sensitive about before?) Do you mean we should have a fist-fight or is it a photographic face-off you have in mind? 😕

Anyway, I'm not interested in the personal clashes, at all. You've been very vocal in this and other threads about how awful flickr is, and I've simply responded in some measure to redress the balance.

Let me know if you intend to turn up in Stockholm with boxing-gloves. But otherwise: the RFF block function. I'm sure there is one somewhere - I've never had to use it.

Well it looked clear enough to me, perhaps it was just convenient to misunderstand, or the concepts were simply beyond you? it allows you to misrepresent what is being said maybe?
 
I joined Flickr just before the changes were announced, so I missed out on the pro membership... With the changes there I decided to try both F and I, to see how drastic the differences are, if noticeable, and to see how the images read, etc., posting many of the same images on both sites for the time being.

@Ipernity: http://www.ipernity.com/home/315601

@Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/94322379@N05/
 
It's obvious you don't understand proper viewing of images by your comments..

Yeah that must be it, chief.

If websites would use a neutral white instead of pure white viewing would be much easier. As was pointed out in a previous post galleries use a neutral white for the walls.

Except we're not talking about pure white vs neutral white here. We were specifically talking about white vs black. So based on your initial post and this one, since they don't use a neutral white somehow pure black is now better?

Yeah I'll take pure white rather than pure black.
 
tajart -- surprisingly both Flickr and Ipernity seemed to load relatively well when I clicked on your links. Maybe it's a bandwidth issue for some of us. Perhaps during high-volume or high-use periods in my neighborhood the transfer speeds aren't as fast as they could be.

When I tried using Flickr earlier this morning, it was agonizingly slow. Clicking on a photo of a 'Contact' produced a failed link. Nothing loaded. But at lunchtime, everything ran smoothly. Very mysterious.

Oh -- and about your shots: nice photos by the way!
 
Still not sure what being given 'fair warning' actually means 😱 but moving on... to something more constructive:

Thinking a bit more about implementing code-injection to change the site appearance for those that feel they want it. It looks like flickr are working on fixes to allow for black or white image backgrounds, but if they decided not to make the change, then a dedicated Chrome extension - there's one called Stylish that's already published a couple of 'white-flickr' modifications - would be the answer.

Anyone using Chrome can try their hand at modifying the Stylish themes so that the site looks exactly the way they want. Some knowledge of CSS is necessary to make changes, but themes can be shared, so I can modify or create a new style if anyone thinks it might be useful? I've only tried the extension for a short time, so I have no idea how efficient it is.

It might even be worth creating a new extension dedicated to making changes only to the flickr site. I'll give this some thought when the dust has settled a bit, and we know a little bit more about what actually remains that needs modifying, but it would be trivial to change backgrounds to white, and only slightly more challenging to get larger margins working on the justified stream views.

And when performance on the new site fluctuates - just remember it's still a work in progress.
 
I don`t know how but I`ve got the old page ( but with the new banner) bookmarked so it still comes up for me.
If I navigate off though it comes back up as the new format.

More and different problems tonight ... erratic loading and random pages.
 
One last observation for tonight - I just noticed that the css property for the photo background-color has been changed sometime this week from the hex value (like #000) to the more layman-friendly longhand (ie: simply 'black').
Could indicate that a black/white toggle choice for image backgrounds could be coming soon?
 
black or white background. Try it.

http://flickriver.com/groups/leicam8/pool/

On the left in the drop down box set "photo size: scale to fit". On the right you can toogle between white and black background. I prefer the black background. It let's me concentrate more on the photo.

People used flickriver a lot because it offered the black background that flickr didn't offer.
 
I find the new design to be style over substance. I dislike the fact that you cannot selected preview images sizes or how many images to view on a page, but rather have to scroll down a never ending page, loading more and more images into your browsers image cache.. Its just completely unproductive and a real waste of time. Plus all important image information is hidden blow. Really bad move Flickr...
 
One last observation for tonight - I just noticed that the css property for the photo background-color has been changed sometime this week from the hex value (like #000) to the more layman-friendly longhand (ie: simply 'black').
Could indicate that a black/white toggle choice for image backgrounds could be coming soon?

It doesn't make a difference in the code. The UI option could say "Dalmation Spots" and the actual color used could be #000 or black.
 
It doesn't make a difference in the code. The UI option could say "Dalmation Spots" and the actual color used could be #000 or black.

This is the thing about these internet discussions - anything one mentions can be misconstrued or misunderstood, because we don't know anything about each other.

I'm currently working at a software-as-a-service startup, developing complex online software, so I know the mechanics of css properties.

The reason I mentioned the longhand change was that this particular property for the image background-color was singled-out amongst all the hex color-codes to be changed to longhand. This suggested to me that maybe it was in order to give easier access to a less technical person - probably a designer rather than a developer - to internally test alternative colors using longhand properties rather than hexadecimal codes. That's why it suggested an imminent change. That's all.
 
Ah, I see what you mean. The same person or code reviewer might change things like that and it doesn't imply anything other than minor tweaks, such as fixing it to match some internal standard, like when an intern writes the hex value when the group standard dictates the actual word should be used. On the other hand, it could be something much bigger like you suggest. 🙂
 
I have been using flickr a lot less lately. And I have been avoiding people's photostreams altogether. It's just one ugly, slow loading mess - in my opinion.

Thank goodness the groups were left basically unmolested. Too bad if I fave something from a group it just gets thrown into another photo jumble. Still hoping the flickr staff will be able to tell the proverbial shinola from the other stuff and fix some things.
 
I like the new Flickr but the one thing I do not like is that stupid Yahoo Tool Bar that appears when you load Flickr. I have it disabled so it does not come up on other sites but still always shows up with Flickr. Has anyone figured out how to get rid of it?
 
the "new flickr" is extremelyy buggy and very slow nowadays, just occasionally i use to check it for samples, but for quality i use other services, i am not even registered any more (sure, i know they keep my file on record, but at least its disabled) as i dont like and agree on their policy and present style.
 
Back
Top Bottom