For everyone in SL who use Flickr

[Jeny Howlett]

1 minute ago, Ethan Paslong said:

i might be reading a different forum... where did they?

read again then

[Ethan Paslong]

2 minutes ago, Jeny Howlett said:

read again then

i don't see it, enlight me please

[Jeny Howlett]

2 minutes ago, Ethan Paslong said:

i don't see it, enlight me please

i can't help you if you can't find it. Enough with trying to provoke me. I am gonna stay civil no matter what.

[Ethan Paslong]

14 minutes ago, Jeny Howlett said:

hope that also includes store vendors ads and event ads

i think those have the risk to get reported, and because it's a photo sharing site, ads might fall under the new rules.

[Skell Dagger]

The announcement that free users will be restricted to 1000 images is easy to find. There is already uproar on the Flickr forums about it. However, as has already been screencapped (and repeated below, for those who read the first post and skipped to this page), there is a guarantee from a Flickr Staff member that SL photography is still photography, and will not be removed (unless, of course, the SL photographer is a free user and has more than 1000 images).

Therefore I would be very interested to know where the information in that petition about people being urged to report non-RL photographs came from. (This is directed at the person who made the original petition, not at Jeny, who has simply brought the forum's attention to said petition.) I have been through the announcement, and I have also ploughed through the Flickr forum topic about it, as well as the Flickr blog post about the justification for reducing free accounts' limits. No sign of a "report non-RL photographs!" request anywhere. That it was included on the petition is alarmist and will only make people panic and kneejerk react, possibly deleting their accounts when they don't need to do so.

I'd suspected a price increase would be coming, since - in all the years I've had a Flickr Pro account - the price has never changed. My account was up for renewal last month, and I was charged the new amount of $49.99 for the upcoming year. For all the use (a hell of a lot!) that I get out of it, that - for me - is a fair price to pay. I can afford it, and I'm content to pay it. I also suspected there would be some kind of limitation for free users (although I thought it would come in the form of a size restriction, such as 1GB of free storage, rather than 1000 images) because - since the decision was made in 2013 to allow all users unlimited storage - it was obvious that Flickr couldn't sustain that kind of offer indefinitely. Yahoo could, but SmugMug can't.

I recall there being a similar uproar when Yahoo acquired Flickr and made sweeping visual changes to the site. Many SL photographers migrated to Ipernity. I got an account there, out of curiosity, but never went back to it after a couple of posts.

[Skell Dagger]

10 minutes ago, Ethan Paslong said:

i think those have the risk to get reported, and because it's a photo sharing site, ads might fall under the new rules.

From what I can gather, I would suspect that anyone wanting to advertise under the new terms would need a Pro account. Specifically the following:

Can I promote my business?

If you are a Flickr Pro member, you can use Flickr to promote your photography business, your products, your photography classes, etc. You can link directly to a shopping cart, checkout page, or pricing pages on other sites, and you can list prices for your images in your Flickr photo descriptions.

[Jeny Howlett]

1 minute ago, Skell Dagger said:

From what I can gather, I would suspect that anyone wanting to advertise under the new terms would need a Pro account. Specifically the following:

Can I promote my business?

If you are a Flickr Pro member, you can use Flickr to promote your photography business, your products, your photography classes, etc. You can link directly to a shopping cart, checkout page, or pricing pages on other sites, and you can list prices for your images in your Flickr photo descriptions.

Thanks

[Callum Meriman]

So, from all this, nothing changes?

(Outside of Pro being needed of course. But I am very much of the opinion that if you use something you should pay for it).

[Cindy Evanier]

3 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

So, from all this, nothing changes?

(Outside of Pro being needed of course. But I am very much of the opinion that if you use something you should pay for it).

Ki just told me he would pay for me to have pro if I wanted.  I said I'd rather have Bon Jovi tickets please. 

[purrrkitten]

I've always wondered why people on second life used flickr. Why not instagram?

[Skell Dagger]

1 minute ago, purrrkitten said:

I've always wondered why people on second life used flickr. Why not instagram?

I have an Instagram account and I can give you one big reason: image quality. With Flickr I can upload and get high-quality resolution, but with Insta every image - no matter how much I optimise it - ends up small and poor quality. I use it because it's another place to be, but there's no way I'd have it as my primary image-posting location.

[purrrkitten]

1 minute ago, Skell Dagger said:

I have an Instagram account and I can give you one big reason: image quality. With Flickr I can upload and get high-quality resolution, but with Insta every image - no matter how much I optimise it - ends up small and poor quality. I use it because it's another place to be, but there's no way I'd have it as my primary image-posting location.

Ohh, I see. I have an instagram for RL and the quality is fine.

[Tarani Tempest]

8 minutes ago, purrrkitten said:

I've always wondered why people on second life used flickr. Why not instagram?

Yes to what Skell said , 100%.  Also... we can post direct links to inworld locations , so those on their PCs can click and have the option to teleport right away. 

Another things, is that the flickr SL community has a been around for many years, we have built it up to the powerhouse it is now. Why move away from it , if we don't have to.  It works well for a lot of us

 

Edited November 1, 2018 by Tarani Tempest
poo typing :P

[Skell Dagger]

3 minutes ago, purrrkitten said:

Ohh, I see. I have an instagram for RL and the quality is fine.

It depends on what you need it for. Personally, I blog, and I like to use high-quality images. I also like to be able to link large images. I'll put some comparisons between Instagram and Flickr behind a spoiler tag...

Crop of my entire (1920x1080) screen, showing an Instagram shot at the biggest size it will go to:

Crop of the same image on Flickr, using Lightbox mode:

The same image on Flickr, at fullscreen size (I can't even fit the whole thing in!)

And, if I go to the original size (2500 pixels) on the download page, well...

That's all I can fit on the screen.

[purrrkitten]

2 minutes ago, Skell Dagger said:

It depends on what you need it for. Personally, I blog, and I like to use high-quality images. I also like to be able to link large images. I'll put some comparisons between Instagram and Flickr behind a spoiler tag...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Crop of my entire (1920x1080) screen, showing an Instagram shot at the biggest size it will go to:

Crop of the same image on Flickr, using Lightbox mode:

The same image on Flickr, at fullscreen size (I can't even fit the whole thing in!)

And, if I go to the original size (2500 pixels) on the download page, well...

That's all I can fit on the screen.

 

I believe you. 

Tho I'm sure a casual SL photo-taker might like instagram.

[Skell Dagger]

1 minute ago, purrrkitten said:

I believe you. 

Tho I'm sure a casual SL photo-taker might like instagram.

People go where the community is, and the SL photography community is mainly on Flickr. I could never get into Plurk, but it appears to be the 'Twitter of SL'. To each their own

[purrrkitten]

4 minutes ago, Skell Dagger said:

Plurk

I forgot this existed. I haven't seen that linked in any profiles for a while now.

[Skell Dagger]

2 minutes ago, purrrkitten said:

I forgot this existed. I haven't seen that linked in any profiles for a while now.

I got a load of hits from it on my blog a few days ago. No idea what was linked, though.

[Tarani Tempest]

6 minutes ago, Skell Dagger said:

People go where the community is, and the SL photography community is mainly on Flickr. I could never get into Plurk, but it appears to be the 'Twitter of SL'. To each their own

I made a Plurk account a long while back, but I never could really get into it.  I think it would probably be a great place for marketing....well way back when, I am not real sure about now.  But , yea... just wasn't my thing I guess.

[Garnet Psaltery]

1 minute ago, Tarani Tempest said:

I made a Plurk account a long while back, but I never could really get into it.  I think it would probably be a great place for marketing....well way back when, I am not real sure about now.  But , yea... just wasn't my thing I guess.

I forgot about mine and went to look recently.  It's covered in cobwebs.

[Tarani Tempest]

Honestly, I don't see how people have time for so much social media lol.   I have RL work, my SL work, I have some SL group obligations and I keep up with flickr. Oh and I occasionally post in here Anymore than that would be madness for me lol.  I don't even have a facebook   Never have had one... and I am not planning on having one.

[Selene Gregoire]

3 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

The announcement that free users will be restricted to 1000 images is easy to find. There is already uproar on the Flickr forums about it. However, as has already been screencapped (and repeated below, for those who read the first post and skipped to this page), there is a guarantee from a Flickr Staff member that SL photography is still photography, and will not be removed (unless, of course, the SL photographer is a free user and has more than 1000 images).

Therefore I would be very interested to know where the information in that petition about people being urged to report non-RL photographs came from. (This is directed at the person who made the original petition, not at Jeny, who has simply brought the forum's attention to said petition.) I have been through the announcement, and I have also ploughed through the Flickr forum topic about it, as well as the Flickr blog post about the justification for reducing free accounts' limits. No sign of a "report non-RL photographs!" request anywhere. That it was included on the petition is alarmist and will only make people panic and kneejerk react, possibly deleting their accounts when they don't need to do so.

I'd suspected a price increase would be coming, since - in all the years I've had a Flickr Pro account - the price has never changed. My account was up for renewal last month, and I was charged the new amount of $49.99 for the upcoming year. For all the use (a hell of a lot!) that I get out of it, that - for me - is a fair price to pay. I can afford it, and I'm content to pay it. I also suspected there would be some kind of limitation for free users (although I thought it would come in the form of a size restriction, such as 1GB of free storage, rather than 1000 images) because - since the decision was made in 2013 to allow all users unlimited storage - it was obvious that Flickr couldn't sustain that kind of offer indefinitely. Yahoo could, but SmugMug can't.

I recall there being a similar uproar when Yahoo acquired Flickr and made sweeping visual changes to the site. Many SL photographers migrated to Ipernity. I got an account there, out of curiosity, but never went back to it after a couple of posts.

Thank you. I'm glad I took a pause from grabbing what few images I do have on Flickr to read the whole thread.  I haven't used it since 2013 when I stopped modeling in SL and InWorldz due to RL things but I may want to start modeling again in the future. It would have looked really bad on my blog if those images were no longer there. I'm still going to back up the images, just in case.

*breathes a sigh of relief* Panic averted, crisis aborted. *collapses*

[Selene Gregoire]

1 hour ago, purrrkitten said:

I've always wondered why people on second life used flickr. Why not instagram?

Instagram wasn't around (to my knowledge) when I started using Flickr. I recently started using Imgur because it is free (I do have an account) and I can't afford to pay for hosting.

[Kia Kiyori]

8 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

I have two flickr accounts and neither of them got this announcement. Are you sure it's this isn't a scam of some kind?

I wouldn't have known a thing about any of it if not for Inara Pey's post: https://modemworld.me/2018/11/01/flickr-announces-significant-account-changes/

Flickr's been fun while it lasted, but can't say I'd be heartbroken never to upload there again once I've reached some kind of limit - especially not with the new breed of greed running the show.

[Kia Kiyori]

8 hours ago, Whirly Fizzle said:

Flickr allows you to set your image to "Photo", "Screenshot" or "Other - art, illustration, CGI etc", so I don't think that Flickr will be removing all none RL photographs.

Correct; it's my understanding that in order to force users of free accounts into paying for them, Smug's agenda is pushing new limits as of today/yesterday (Nov 1); less space + the removal of photos from those free accounts that have posted more than 1,000 pics, starting from the oldest (photos) to the newest.