Where do you publish your photos online?

[sanmich]

Flickr for raw material.
weebly for a more organized site.

 

[silent1]

Does anybody use tumblr?
It is somehow more convenient than flickr in that you can easily customize the layout and have no limitations on the number of photos you can post.
However, it lacks groups and a decent feedback system, though you can still "like" or reply to photo posts.
I've got mine and I'm quite satisfied: http://blog.stefanomattia.it

 

[NickTrop]

Mostly Facebook. I also post (more so in the past) a lot on Deviantart.

 

[ramosa]

I use flickr. It works well with Lightroom.

 

[squinza]

Flickr: cheap and very effective!

 

[DNG]

Zenfolio for my family stuff that is office save
Pbase for galleries that contain adult rated stuff among other galleries.
Opera for storage of images I embed in forums like this.
RFF galleries for a limited stuff.

Edit
Picasa Web albums for my 1-Year-1-lens project... Yellow link below.

 

[DeanSilliman]

No Picasa love here at all? Or even mention? I have used MobileMe but am ready for a better solution. Flickr seems abusive to the user's sensibilities.

Dean

 

[peterm1]

I have been using Flickr as it works reasonably well as a means of getting feedback from a potentially large number of other people and is convenient.

There are aspects about it that I do not like however. The layout is very basic and there is no choice (as far as I am aware) about how your images are laid out and displayed. This is a problem. I would like to use a different template than the standard one.

Flickr also has some funny attitudes. Recently they changed their corporate look and feel and in doing so made a policy that the URL of users' images would be hidden and that you could only post links to the image at Flickr. This would force people on sites like this to come to Flickr to view images - no more embedded Flickr hosted images on forums like this one. Fortunately its not hard to get around this restriction presently if you know how and its still possible to directly post an image from Flickr to this and other forums.

But I dislike the presumption involved in this policy which benefits no one but Flicker (and does not really benefit them). I know that I for one would quit Flickr in an instant if they found a more effective way of blocking people from embedding Flickr images in other sites - this after all is one of my MAIN reasons for uploading to Flickr.

Ie I must get off my bum and start searching for potential new options. I would not be averse to setting up my own image site if I could find suitable templates and a host site that makes it easy to upload and manage them.

 

[wgerrard]

Flickr's single biggest advantage is that your photos will be exposed to more people there than anywhere else. A homebrew site, or a site on SmugMug or Zenfolio to which you've attached your own domain name, is almost certainly going to be invisible to everyone else unless someone sends them a link to click on.

 

[Darshan]

Peter, I don't know if I understand you correctly. Pardon me if I am wrong, but if you are saying that you cannot embed an image from flickr into this forum..I think you might be wrong.

Now only if I know how to embed an image from my RFF gallery into this thread...

 

[chrismoret]

What a great thread to promote my blog!!! ;-D

http://chrismoretphotosgrafix.blogspot.com.

Just a sucker for a pageload

 

[mooge]

Chris- nice photos but why are they so small? I think it would be nicer if they were bigger.

 

[David Murphy]

I started with Photobucket, but all the Flash gadgetry, ads, and general pizazz often makes my browser crash and just slows things down like hell - I almost can't stand it, so I started using Flickr. After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?! That's way too expensive in my view.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I started with Photobucket, but all the Flash gadgetry, ads, and general pizazz often makes my browser crash and just slows things down like hell - I almost can't stand it, so I started using Flickr. After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?! That's way too expensive in my view.

Too expensive? Seriously? I spent more than that yesterday to take my son out to dinner. Its practically free considering that its for a whole year. I pay $20 A MONTH for my web hosting, and its worth every single cent.

 

[David Murphy]

Chris, yes, but how many Web sites do you think there are out there that have fees and subscriptions? At $20-40 each to subscribe to this or that, it adds up real fast.

 

[tlitody]

Chris, yes, but how many Web sites do you think there are out there that have fees and subscriptions? At $20-40 each to subscribe to this or that, it adds up real fast.

And how many of them have you subscribed to?

The whole world have web sites and basic we hosting costs very very little, especially considering it is giving you world wide advertising coverage. $20 too expensive? I don't think so. Unfortunately the open source software community have developed a community of people who expect to get something for nothing. Everyone wants the Best for Free.

Just pay for your own web hosting and and put up one of the free gallery software packages. You will get more space than you ever need.

 

[David Murphy]

I've subscribed to a few in fact. Yes the Internet should be cheap if not free. We, the US tax payers already paid for it.

And how many of them have you subscribed to?

The whole world have web sites and basic we hosting costs very very little, especially considering it is giving you world wide advertising coverage. $20 too expensive? I don't think so. Unfortunately the open source software community have developed a community of people who expect to get something for nothing. Everyone wants the Best for Free.

Just pay for your own web hosting and and put up one of the free gallery software packages. You will get more space than you ever need.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I've subscribed to a few in fact. Yes the Internet should be cheap if not free. We, the US tax payers already paid for it.

No you haven't. Most of the internet was built and is owned by private companies. That's why you pay your local phone or cable company to connect you to the net in the form of DSL, cable internet, FiOS, or Dial-up. As for the content on the net, including services like Flickr, it costs the producers of that content money to write the software and support the millions of users on it as well as paying someone to host it. As a photographer you ought to know better than to demand that the creators of intellectual property should give it free.

As for whether its worth the $25 for Flickr Pro, you have to decide if photography is that important to you. For me its the second most important thing in my life (after my son) and well worth every penny of the $240 a year I pay for hosting my own website.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Just a personal opinion and yours may differ:

I believe there is a significant inverse correlation between the ease of posting images on line and the quality of images posted. Similar relationship with the cost.

Personally I almost never look at Flickr. It reminds me of what you get when things are free, quick, easy and require little thought.

If you don't like what I have on my website, understand that is the limit of my talent. It is not because I simply did not put enough time, thought and effort into posting them there.

 

[wgerrard]

After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?!

Every Flickr competitor I'm aware of either limits free use or uses your photo pages as ad platforms. They have to make money somehow.