1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Pet peeve

Discussion in 'The Watering Hole' started by fsuscotphoto, May 6, 2013.

  1. fsuscotphoto

    fsuscotphoto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    819
    Feb 15, 2013
    St. Cloud, FL
    Ron
    Though I've not been here very long I'm ready to post my pet peeve of photo sites.

    It really frosts my rear end to start reading a thread that I really want to view the photos only to be greeted by post after post where the pics are no longer available! I kind of understand when the Flickr is not a pro account as they have limited room, but when I see post after post after post where it's a pro account or a personal web address and the pictures just aren't there.

    I don't post a lot of pics and have none here yet, but I know that when I do, that they will be there as long as the thread is there.

    I'll sit down now and put the soapbox back in the corner.
     
  2. Kirill

    Kirill Mu-43 Regular

    78
    Feb 13, 2013
    Tallinn, Estonia
    I don't understand why people are still cutting Flicker so much slack while it cannot even permanently display their photos in forum threads.
     
  3. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    926
    Nov 6, 2012
    Canada
    I can't afford Flickr Pro and other photo hosting sites aren't as ubiquitous :(.
     
  4. Adubo

    Adubo SithLord

    Nov 4, 2010
    Globetrotter
    Andrew
    I redirected this thread to the watering hole as it isnt appropriate to where it was.

    Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 App
     
  5. fin azvandi

    fin azvandi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 12, 2011
    South Bend, IN
    Even without Flickr Pro, you can link to *any* of your photos regardless of whether they are still in your photostream or not. Only the most recent 200 show up in your photostream but the older ones are not deleted. They remain in whatever groups you added them to and will be visible on forums if you use the html/bbcode "share" drop-down menu. I don't have Pro but I just checked a couple of my older photos and they're still visible here in posts from 2+ years ago.
     
  6. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    I noticed lots of annoying flikr dummy pictures too. What should we do? Is there a trick? Or should we use another site?

    Edit: I got it now. In Flikr there is the "Share" button above the picture. Then choose "Grab the Link"
     
  7. fsuscotphoto

    fsuscotphoto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    819
    Feb 15, 2013
    St. Cloud, FL
    Ron
    Thx, I didn't know, where to put it so I put the forum that had the most 'not available' pics.

    Ron
     
  8. Kirill

    Kirill Mu-43 Regular

    78
    Feb 13, 2013
    Tallinn, Estonia
    On different forums I link my photos fromo the Blogspot page I have which is totally free and I have never seen my image links broken, my photos always remain viewable in various thread of various messageboards. Why can't Flickr ensure the same?
     
  9. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Good suggestion to link to blog pictures.
    I did a quick test with blogger. It all works. But the benefit of Flikr is I have an "Upload to Flikr" button in my photo manager. So all my "pretty" pictures go there. I have no "Upload to Blogger" button. So I don't know if it's possible to streamline that process. Blogger seems to just have a clumpy html dialog.
     
  10. If an image within flickr is replaced or deleted by the user or replaced by the editing/uploading software they are running, any embedded links within threads will be broken i.e. it is not the fault of the car but rather the loose nut behind the wheel.
     
  11. entropicremnants

    entropicremnants Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 16, 2012
    John Griggs
    If you replace a photo on flickr with a later version, it breaks the link. I try to go back and hit all my posts and fix it, but I don't think everyone realizes it. You have to go back when you change a photo and get a new link to the new version.

    I have NEVER had flickr break a link unless I did something to change the photo. In my experience it has been nothing but reliable and there is no need to cut it slack -- just a need to understand how the system works.
     
  12. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    A Flickr Pro account is less than 2 bucks a month if you buy two years in one go. If you can afford a camera without resorting to ramen noodles for a few months, you can afford Flickr's Pro account. The question is whether it's worth it to you.
     
  13. Adubo

    Adubo SithLord

    Nov 4, 2010
    Globetrotter
    Andrew
    Please errbody, dont forget to respect one another's opinion and please DONT BE RUDE.


    Respect given is respect earned. C'mon now.

    Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 App
     
  14. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    Vin
    Yeah man Flickr has the best deal of all the photo sites.

    Also a lot of these 'broken' pics the OP was talking about are solely the fault of the poster. Flickr can't link a photo that's no longer there.
     
  15. Djarum

    Djarum Super Moderator

    Dec 15, 2009
    Huntsville, AL, USA
    Jason
    It begs the question, how long do forum members expect an image to be availabe? If I had limited file storage and put photos on forums frequently, I could see needing to remove those images after some period of time. It might be annoying for a week old thread to have broken links for photos. What about a month old thread? 3 month? At what point is it ok for the poster to break those links?
     
  16. sinclair

    sinclair Mu-43 Veteran

    I just upload photos as 1024x768 on Google Albums and then there is no problem.
     
  17. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    :smile:......
     
  18. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    In other words... it's actually the PRO users who are getting dead Flickr links, not the ones who don't pay for a pro account (since replacing a photo is an option only available on pro accounts). Interesting. That's the opposite of what was proposed in the original post.

    If you don't have a pro account, your images will roll-over on your photostream, but they are NOT deleted by Flickr and direct links to them are still valid. If you have a direct link to the photo you can still access it yourself too... you just won't be able to access it through your Photostream or Sets. The photos don't disappear nor their direct links.

    So if you don't buy pro and your images are linked to this forum, then they are more likely to stay here forever due to your not having a pro account... since now it becomes difficult for you to go back and change any of them. :)
     
  19. The ability to replace an image with a pro account is very useful, if say you make only a small adjustment to an image and don't want to have to name it, tag it, or add it to sets, groups, or galleries all over again. Being able to link an image to amother webpage is a useful feature but is hardly the main reason to have a Flickr account.
     
  20. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Yup, I agree. There are only two reasons I will pay for a pro account (I've only done so on and off) and that is 1) to avoid the 200 image roll-over, and 2) to replace images without deleting and re-posting them.

    And even then, the only reason I really care about that 200 image limit is because I like to link directly to Flickr images in the Flickr forums since they hide images from any other host (how lame). That, and I also like to play this photo game in one of the groups I'm in, but it's difficult to play when you're locked out of your older images.

    As far as linking images on the web, I don't need Flickr for that and I would be ever frustrated if I had to rely on Flickr for that. I link images off my own web server, and that is by far the most reliable method. I remember once on one of the websites I used to visit that they had restricted all images to Photobucket for some ridiculous reason and hid images from any other source. Holy, was that ever a pain in the arse... Kind of like what Flickr does on their own forums (images from anywhere else get a button instead of being automatically displayed), but implemented even stricter.