flickr pages

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm probably going to switch over to Wikimedia Commons full time, since it's donation-driven and I already contribute there. Wouldn't hurt to have more road photos on there, after all.

Isn't part of the deal there that anyone can download or freely use the photos you host there?

Yep, with attribution. It's a big turn off for a lot of people (who don't want commercial re-use), but generally it doesn't spread beyond clickbait lists and the occasional interesting website. I've had a few of my photos printed in materials that were sent to me by their publishers...which felt pretty neat.

That isn't too bad then so long as you get a credit.  I left a Facebook group over someone snipping one of my Flickr photos and not giving a source credit.  I had someone request to use my US 1/FL 4a maps in an online book which I was happy to do for free with a source credit. 

[AsphaltPlanet]

People use unattributed photos all the time.  I think the only true way to stop people from using unattributed photos is to not share them to the internet.  Unfortunately (imho), people seem to think that once something is uploaded to the internet that it belongs to everyone.

[hotdogPi]

I am fully okay with others using my photos, as long as they don't claim it's theirs.

[AsphaltPlanet]

I will ask for payment if someone requests using a photo for commercial use.  I don't really like seeing my photos distributed elsewhere on the internet, because then if someone wishes to use them commercially they're less likely to ask me if they find them somewhere that isn't on my website.

Though, that said, I've had so few photos used commercially that it probably doesn't really matter anyways.

[Max Rockatansky]

I will ask for payment if someone requests using a photo for commercial use.  I don't really like seeing my photos distributed elsewhere on the internet, because then if someone wishes to use them commercially they're less likely to ask me if they find them somewhere that isn't on my website.

Though, that said, I've had so few photos used commercially that it probably doesn't really matter anyways.

In the case of the US 1/FL4a maps I described above I was also given a free download copy of the book.  It was by the Pigeon Key Foundation so it was more of an honor for me that they asked for my help in making their Overseas Highway history book.  I've never had much expectation that anything I do road related will yield some sort of monetary value, for the most part I do the things I do (photos included) because they are fun and worthwhile for me to do. 

[AsphaltPlanet]

Oh yeah, I take photos for fun too, but I take the stance that if someone wants to use my work in something they plan to make money on, I should make money on that too.

[jeffandnicole]

Well, shit. I have over 2500 photos on there. Whatever happened to ad-driven services?

When was the last time you clicked on an ad?

Multiply that by hundreds of thousands of people, and the companies simply aren't going to pay a lot of money to a website to have their ad ignored. 

I think most of them are backed up on my laptop, but if that ever dies...

I'm using a service called SOS Online, which I bought the last time my computer crashed.  I was very thankful that the repair store I took it to saved my pics, but that taught me I needed something else.  Thankfully I purchased the account back when it was unlimited free forever.  They've since converted to a yearly pricing plan, and they've told me several times that I need to update my account or I'll lose my account, but that's never happened.

There's also Google Photos, which is free.

People use unattributed photos all the time.  I think the only true way to stop people from using unattributed photos is to not share them to the internet.  Unfortunately (imho), people seem to think that once something is uploaded to the internet that it belongs to everyone.

As long as the photo isn't used in a malicious way, it's not really something to get all upset about.  Heck, all the GSV photos, Google Map photos, etc used on here are property of Google, yet I don't see many going out of their way to inform others of the source.

And if someone manages to find their photo on a website somewhere, just imagine how many other places it may have been used without the original creator knowing!

[Max Rockatansky]

Oh yeah, I take photos for fun too, but I take the stance that if someone wants to use my work in something they plan to make money on, I should make money on that too.

I should note that I'm referring to non-profit organizations which has been what I've dealt exclusively up to this point.  To that end they are much more interested in historical context then they are so much more photography.  In the case of the Pigeon Key Foundation I had made some simple map illustrations showing the difference in the alignments of the Florida 4a version of the 1928 Overseas Highway compared to the US 1 version that is now in use.  Had someone wanted privately fund a book they would make a profit off of then I would request to be compensated in some way.

[hbelkins]

I started using Flickr because it was easier than trying to do web pages and uploading them to a provider. I may end up letting my Pro account expire, since the cost is going to double, and just use Facebook. At least it's still free, and pages are publicly viewable to anyone. The only reason I pay is to share my pics with roadgeeks, and I'm beginning to wonder if it's worth the cost.

[paulthemapguy]

Well this is great.  Just great.  I recently crossed the threshold of having 10,000 pictures uploaded, too.  $50 per year really doesn't sound very affordable for such a simple service.  Are there any more reasonably-priced cloud services for image hosting?  I really just want to host and store the images...I don't need any other fancy services or features.

[MNHighwayMan]

Well this is great.  Just great.  I recently crossed the threshold of having 10,000 pictures uploaded, too.  $50 per year really doesn't sound very affordable for such a simple service.  Are there any more reasonably-priced cloud services for image hosting?  I really just want to host and store the images...I don't need any other fancy services or features.

Sorry to say, but anything that doesn't suck is going to cost money. Hosting just isn't free, or at least not without drawbacks.

The pictures I post to this forum, I upload to Imgur. Making an account is free, but the images are compressed a bit. I don't know if there's any limits to the number of images, but I have ~1800 of mine on there and haven't had any problems. Sorting and labeling images is kind of clunky, but the ability is there.

Honestly, in your position I'd just pay the $50. Not worth the hassle of moving everything, and $50/year for practically unlimited, original resolution images is a pretty good deal.

[froggie]

^ Regarding cloud storage, iCloud is $0.99/month (~$12/year) for 50GB and $2.99/month (~$36/year) for 200GB, but it's not easy to share photos stored on iCloud.

[Henry]

I guess we better hope that the free accounts stay at 1,000 photos, because FWIW, they could go down to 500 in a few years, and then we'd all be screwed to the wall!

[US71]

Well this is great.  Just great.  I recently crossed the threshold of having 10,000 pictures uploaded, too.  $50 per year really doesn't sound very affordable for such a simple service.  Are there any more reasonably-priced cloud services for image hosting?  I really just want to host and store the images...I don't need any other fancy services or features.

FWIW, the first year is discounted ($35). That gives me time to explore other options.

[formulanone]

Well this is great.  Just great.  I recently crossed the threshold of having 10,000 pictures uploaded, too.  $50 per year really doesn't sound very affordable for such a simple service.  Are there any more reasonably-priced cloud services for image hosting?  I really just want to host and store the images...I don't need any other fancy services or features.

FWIW, the first year is discounted ($35). That gives me time to explore other options.

I just updated to Pro, so here's some thoughts.

1) The $35 deal/year deal is a clickthough promo (or use code FLICKRPRO30) used by 11/30. I promise, there's no benefit to me linking you to it this way, just want to make sure you get the deal as promised. If you just click the "Pro" link in your profile, you'll get the $49.99/year offer. If you don't trust me, click on the link for the announcement to cap limits at 1000 for non-pro members.

2) There's some neat stuff in the stats, but it wasn't making nor breaking my day. Some of my stats eventually showed up within a few minutes, but while they've counted all my views (just over a million, presumably since 2005), there's no breakdown for the days before going Pro.

3) I can see which photos are suddenly getting a lot of attention; though it's probably safe to say that a bot might doing most of the looking (for example, today it's a very-average photo of a runway). Or that it got attention from some other site.

4) There's a way to see your Source Breakdown; where are the clicks coming from? In my case, most of it seems to be is IntraFlickr traffic. There's a section for Social Media and Search. There's a few on Other but all of it shows "no referrer".

5) I'll probably never use the Auto Uploadr. I like to know what's being uploaded, being able to tag them and move them where I want, and in what order.

[Max Rockatansky]

I've noticed since I updated my account that a lot of my monochromes are getting viewed a lot.  I suspect a bot since they tend to be really inane pictures that don't provide much context outside their parent album..so WTH. 

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/albums/72157675874106048
I-270 W Bound from Riverview Drive to MO Route 367.

[roadman65]

I see January 8, 2019 is the last free day to post photos for flickr.  After that you must pay to upload (a set monthly package) any photos over 1000.

I currently have over 3k photos so I am locked if I continue to add.  Are there any other sites out there cheaper or for free?  Personally I think its time for a website of my own, but that may be more than what these free (or even Flickr now lol) is asking.  Any recommendations?

[D-Dey65]

I don't have that many (in the 1300s as of this writing), but I'm still in a mad dash to remove many of my pics from Flickr right now.

I am fully okay with others using my photos, as long as they don't claim it's theirs.

I don't, and I try as best as I can to deny any claims to the pics that aren't mine... and I have a lot of those.

[paulthemapguy]

I think that since Flickr doesn't want me uploading any more photos to their site, I won't be adding photos to Flickr anymore.  I signed up for storage on Google photos.  Even having 10,000 photos uploaded, I'm only using about 25GB.  So I got 100GB of storage on Google, which will be the home of any new photos I upload.  I don't really need a whole terabyte of storage.

It's not like this information is really important to anyone other than myself, but I found a solution that only costs $20 per year, rather than the $50 per year that Flickr wants.  So I just wanted people to know that this option is out there 

[hbelkins]

I'm getting caught up on my Flickr uploads from last year. I've been lax in updating the directory on the Millennium Highway web site, but the Flickr stream at http://www.flicker.com/photos/hbelkins/albums is up to date for 2018. Included in the most recent upload are my various Kentucky photos from last year, as well as pics from my trip to the recent abandoned PA Turnpike meet.

[formulanone]

There's always WikiMedia Commons if you're okay with sharing (i.e. no copyrights). That, and presumably the photos have to be of something encyclopedic.

[US 89]

I have zero desire to feed the greed of Flickr's owners and operators by buying Pro. As a result, I've gotten an Imgur account, which appears to have no upload limit (which is all I want, really; I don't care if it compresses the images a little bit, as long as you can still clearly see what's there).

https://us89.imgur.com/

[D-Dey65]

There's always WikiMedia Commons if you're okay with sharing (i.e. no copyrights). That, and presumably the photos have to be of something encyclopedic.

I'm still going to need a place for my copyvio stuff. Does Google Photos have privacy shields? In other words, do they allow you to post pictures only you can see?

UPDATE; January 8, 2019; Well, it's now January 8, 2019 12:05 A.M., and I'm still being allowed to remove my more than 1,000 pics. It's just a slow process, because my PC has been forcing me to refresh my pages a lot of times.

[paulthemapguy]

If you notice any asterisks in the titles of my Flickr albums, it's because I'm marking them safe from the Great Flickr Purge of 2019.