Turn Your Old Camera Into Cash With An Instant Quote From MPB

Flickr, Good or bad?


I was reading a forum post yesterday and the OP mentioned that they had a flickr account. One reply was very negative about Flickr, calling it the Devil Incarnate. Could somebody explain why?, what am I missing?Smile


Tim

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Gaucho 18 2.8k 2 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 9:59AM
Cos ePz is the centre of the universe and everything else is rubbish...or words to that effect Wink
CaptivePhotons 17 1.7k 2 England
4 Sep 2011 10:15AM

Quote:Flickr, Good or bad?


I'd say good and bad.

ePz and flickr are different beasts, each has their good and bad points. I have accounts on both.

Good Flickr:

Personally I have more interaction with various others on there, more comments and activity

Bad Flickr:

15 gazillion uploads a day

Good ePz:

Friendly, one upload per day, comps, forums, E2

Bad ePz:

One upload per day, Having to pay for larger uploads

Just a scratch on the surface there and obviously others will have differing opinions.
User_Removed 10 4.6k 1 Scotland
4 Sep 2011 10:55AM
The comment about Flickr was meant to convey that if a Forumite wishes other to comment upon some of his images, then generally the preference seems to be that he posts them to his EPZ portfolio rather than asking folk to look at them on a remote site.
keith selmes 16 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 10:57AM
1)
Flickr will probably be seen as a competing site, so direct links to Flickr, or requests that people view work on Flickr, which lead people away from Ephotozine, are not really very polite. I've never tried putting a Tesco advertisement in Sainsburys, but I expect they wouldn't leave it up very long. So its a bit nicer if people post examples of their work on Ephotoizine and keep the discussion in house, if thats at all possible.

2)
I've never liked Flickr.
When a Google search brought me to Ephotozine it seemed well structured, informative, useful and (fairly) friendly.
A bit of a rough house sometimes, but basically helpful.
When Google took me to Phot.net, I found tons of esoteric info on vintage and antique equipment and techniques, straight from people who use them. And a deep philosphy forum. And mainly quite polite and mature because the mods jump on people pretty quickly if they misbehave.
When Google fetched me up at Flickr it was just a hopeless mess. Very frustrating, because in odd parts it has vey good content, but so much of it is so scrappy, I just feel I haven't the time to spend on it. Devil Incarnate might be overdoing it a bit though.
ianrobinson 10 1.2k 8 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 2:10PM
i have accounts on flickr and this and find both good for there own needs.
Overread 12 4.1k 19 England
4 Sep 2011 3:35PM
Flickr and EPZ are very different beasts

Flickr - this is primarily an photo hosting website with some built in community elements. It's targeted purely at people wanting to host photos online without a profit drive for the uploader. It's strong point is that it allows you to upload as much as you need to and also categorise and organise your works (though it should be noted for full use you do have to pay a small use fee - less than a magazine subscription).

It's weaker points are that its community element is somewhat weaker, you can't track posts/threads and whislt there are many sub communities each one only has a single thread section (not several to break up topics like a forum has).
The other weaker point is that it has a very large number of award groups who's sole purpose is to give out mostly meaningless, awards to uploads. However its an optional part and you don't have to take part at all


EPZ - this is not an image host, whilst they do host photos the one a day limit makes it much more of an online selective gallery of ones work. The community sections are also much more strongly supported through the forum and general interface, allowing not just the breakup of topics into subsections but also features such as more refined searching and thread tracking.
EPZ also has a much smaller community so the daily uploads and site activities are much easier to follow than on flickr where the massive community can be daunting for some.
We also can't forget that EPZ has its articles side with large amounts of articles on equipment and methods being provided by the EPZ team and by the membership. It also sports a classfields (seriously go check it out some great macro lenses for sale there TongueGrin ) and even has tie-ins with the printing/shop sibling website whose name I totally forget.

In short they are similar, yet very different services and I've never had a problem with using both at the same time since each offers slightly different features to the user.
adrian_w Plus
12 3.8k 4 England
4 Sep 2011 4:47PM
I think the "devil incarnate" comment was actually meant as a joke within the context of the thread.
User_Removed 16 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 5:14PM
I agree with the other guys especially Keith's Tesco analogy.

I'm always suspicious of big sites like Flickr and what they might do with my photographs. I'm always concerned that if I don't study the small print carefully and often they could be renting my pictures out to South American corporations without me realising I'd agreed to it.
CaptivePhotons 17 1.7k 2 England
4 Sep 2011 5:35PM

Quote:Flickr will probably be seen as a competing site, so direct links to Flickr, or requests that people view work on Flickr, which lead people away from Ephotozine, are not really very polite. I've never tried putting a Tesco advertisement in Sainsburys, but I expect they wouldn't leave it up very long.




Quote:I agree with the other guys especially Keith's Tesco analogy


Unless I missed a post somewhere I have not seen any links to Flickr in this or the original thread. The OP was merely asking why Flickr was viewed as 'the devil incarnate'.
Overread 12 4.1k 19 England
4 Sep 2011 6:04PM

Quote:I agree with the other guys especially Keith's Tesco analogy.

I'm always suspicious of big sites like Flickr and what they might do with my photographs. I'm always concerned that if I don't study the small print carefully and often they could be renting my pictures out to South American corporations without me realising I'd agreed to it.



Actually Flickr has one of the better terms and conditions of use - no thieving in theirs; unlike the likes of Photobucket or Facebook for example
User_Removed 16 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 7:08PM
@TB you're right nobody did do a link so I was sort of wrong to back that point. However it's been brought up before about offsite linking to Flickr and people have had to remove links to their Flickr portfolio and I think it's one of the reasons it's not looked upon fondly on this site.

Also the guy is asking if Flickr is good or bad, and link or no link, if we start singing Flickr's praises it is a bit like singing the praises of Tesco in Sainsbury's.
CaptivePhotons 17 1.7k 2 England
4 Sep 2011 7:31PM
So in effect you're saying is that the good folk at epz towers would prefer to reamin ignorant of what the competition offers and what members here might or might not like about Flickr.

I wonder if Tesco ignores Sainsburys.
User_Removed 16 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
4 Sep 2011 7:53PM
I'm not saying anything of the sort. There's a condition that forum topics don't promote rival sites and I guess that the good folk at epz towers are quite capable of asking members (eg through a survey) what they like about rival sites if they want that information.
4 Sep 2011 7:58PM
Its not all necessarily down to not promoting other sites, although that is obviously a factor (the Sainsbury's factor) but also its not really fair on members of this site, some who help support it with e2, to have anyone join just to link to their Flickr (or other) account.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.