New Flickr limits

[LucasLaughing]

12 hours ago, pombe said:

For me, it's less about the photos than the links.  All my photos are backed up elsewhere, so I couldn't care less if Flickr deleted them.  But to find another service and redo  the hundreds of links is so tedious, there's no way I could be convinced to do it myself.  Which is a shame, since I would hate to break all the images for the stories I've created for the rolebuilding games I've played.

Yeah, I'm in exactly the same boat.  I've got all my AG builds, plus 5 years of SoNE builds - it's going to take forever to update the links if I decide to go that route 

[Pate-keetongu]

I think it's alright. I mean, they give us the service, hire people, develop the site and so on, it takes money, and it's business. They don't have actual obligation the give people things free, not even in internet. At least to buggers like me who even have their Adblocks on to prevent them from getting money from ads.

Flickr is my main channel and I'll stay there, pretty much what ever happens. I have 700+ photos, and it takes three years or something the get to the thousand so there isn't any real pressure to buy pro yet. I've been in Flickr since 2009 and most of my followers and comments are there. I've though about buying pro several times, mostly to get the professional-looking pro tag next to my name; I don't really need advanced stats. Now the price of the pro also got higher, which is a bugger; but 50 dollers won't ruin my wallet.

When I joined they had the 200 photos limit, which was of course lot worse, and I began writing my blog to put all the other shots of creatiosn there. It was a good choice anyway, and I like writing my blog.

By the way, I was slightly put pleasantly surprised with the quality of discussion here. I remember when Brickshelf was about to shut down in 2008 or something, and there was lots of sheer rage around. But it was ten years ago; people have grown up, or new users are nicer. Good thing anyway, that.

[Agent Kallus]

I deiced to preemptively cull a lot of non-moc photos but I was only at around 400 , so I'll be okay for a while, it was like I uploaded regularly or anything. I'll probably show less separate angles in future maybe one main shot and then splice all the rest into one image.

[mccoyed]

Changing a policy this drastically without concern for the actual users on the service is anti-consumer, even if you have a generally pro-business attitude. Clawing back service to boost revenue is a desperation move likely brought upon by Flickr's fierce competition from Instagram. Look at the records of user numbers for either service over the last five years. Flickr seems to want to stay alive by becoming a boutique service with a premium fee. That's not only a raw deal for just about everyone who uses Flickr, it's not a vote of confidence for the company's long-term sustainability. I think it's pertinent to wonder why there isn't a tiered service plan, for example, instead of a single tier and comparatively steep $50/year price tag.

That so many of us are stuck and will have to essentially support this policy change with their dollars is disheartening to me because I believe Flickr knows that they'll make enough money to balance out the loss of entire swaths of their current user base and they're going to be rewarded essentially for making this change, rather than being abandoned like they deserve. Flickr has users beyond the AFOL community that rely on the free service, so it isn't going to be just us who will see a massive shift as a result of this. Moreover, AFOLs and RBGs seem to have been on a recent downward trend in general and I don't think this loss of a cornerstone platform is going to do us any favors. Some of us have economic circumstances that allow us to treat this as a cost/benefit decision but others cannot and will not be able to pay $50/year to post pictures of Lego. Others will ditch Flickr on principle.

I would also caution people from migrating to Instagram. Instagram is owned by Facebook, a company that has been massively co-opted by their own business and political interest (or lack thereof) and has been hit by major scandals for who they've been selling data to. I got rid of Facebook after the Cambridge Analytica stuff came to light and I personally won't be using any products owned by them, which includes Instagram. I know I have little chance of convincing people to rethink Instagram or Facebook as most of us are even more entrenched on those platforms than we are on Flickr. I just think this needs to be said.

[dr_spock]

On a side note,  deep linked Photobucket images work again now but with a Photobucket watermark on them.   Looks like they changed their policy again. 

[LEGO Historian]

I think that people should first "cull the herd" in their photos.  I have 30,000 photos (the majority which I don't keep online because they're for my Unofficial LEGO Sets/Parts Collectors Guide).  But the problem with photos that you post here on Eurobricks and elswehere, will get a broken link if removed, which is no fun at all.

One of my biggest beefs about Flickr was not a Flickr problem, but lazy posters... who just post an image labeled with their photo ID.... such as "DSC001040", which is useless when you try to do a "LEGO" search.  But I digress.

I do like Flickr's large image size capacity, not available on some other image hosting sites.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by LEGO Historian

[Darth Talon]

Hi

Hi

[anothergol]

One year later, Flickr now has become ad-infested, and its JPG compression is reaching the minimum acceptable. I remember when pics there had barely visible artefacts, it's too something that's lost now.

[dr_spock]

I get ads when I am not logged in to Flickr to browse pics.  I don't see ads when I'm logged in.  Weird. 

 

 

[anothergol]

Without being "pro"?  Here I'm not seeing the actual ads either (they get blocked), but each like 5 picture when I browse using the < >, is a placeholder for an ad, so pretty much each 5th image is a blank now.