Wait, the pictures move?
April 8, 2008 8:00 PM Subscribe
Video on Flickr! Paying members of the popular community photo sharing website are now able to upload videos up to 90 seconds in length or 150MB in size. At first critical of the length limitation, some think it's a good decision. Check out the FAQ for details on what is/isn't accepted and why, and watch some videos in the first video group pool.
I'm genuinely pretty excited about this. I think it was an extremely smart move to limit the time as to not try to become yet another youtube, and instead focus on providing "a long photo" with sound. There are already lots of cool videos, I especially enjoy the one linked too on the blog post of the Tanzanian School Choir.
It also helps that the player is very slick and minimalist and fits the design of the flickr website perfectly.
posted by patr1ck at 8:08 PM on April 8, 2008
It also helps that the player is very slick and minimalist and fits the design of the flickr website perfectly.
posted by patr1ck at 8:08 PM on April 8, 2008
Once it gets beyond being observational, it could spawn a whole new 90 second movie genre.
posted by carter at 8:12 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by carter at 8:12 PM on April 8, 2008
Flash Cinema?
posted by brundlefly at 8:14 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by brundlefly at 8:14 PM on April 8, 2008
I'm kind of surprised that flickr is doing this. I mean, there aren't any real barriers to already posting videos on youtube, are there? I'm not so sure the internet needs another venue for home videos.
posted by Dave Faris at 8:24 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by Dave Faris at 8:24 PM on April 8, 2008
The time limit is a great idea. It's too late to compete with YouTube anyway...they hit critical mass a long time ago.
The cool thing is being able to integrate those crappy cell phone/point-and-shoot camera videos into my photostream. They occupy the same mental space; it's always seemed odd to me that I have a bunch of pictures from my trip to Maine and then a link that says "by the way, here are a couple 30-second video clips that go with these over on Vimeo."
It's slow as balls right now, but I expect that will improve over time. Great feature.
posted by danb at 8:24 PM on April 8, 2008
The cool thing is being able to integrate those crappy cell phone/point-and-shoot camera videos into my photostream. They occupy the same mental space; it's always seemed odd to me that I have a bunch of pictures from my trip to Maine and then a link that says "by the way, here are a couple 30-second video clips that go with these over on Vimeo."
It's slow as balls right now, but I expect that will improve over time. Great feature.
posted by danb at 8:24 PM on April 8, 2008
As a longtime flickr user, I was pretty underwhelmed. Once upon a time flickr was sort of innovative, but this just reeks of 'me too!' and doesn't do anything that other sites don't already do better.
posted by mullingitover at 8:26 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by mullingitover at 8:26 PM on April 8, 2008
Yeah, I really like this feature. I wonder if flickr could become as synonymous fo videographers (sp?) as it is for photogs.....
posted by lattiboy at 8:28 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by lattiboy at 8:28 PM on April 8, 2008
Dave Faris: "I'm kind of surprised that flickr is doing this. I mean, there aren't any real barriers to already posting videos on youtube, are there? I'm not so sure the internet needs another venue for home videos."
The flickr videos seem to be much higher compression quality than youtube, more like vimeo. This is good (maybe not for vimeo though).
posted by splatta at 8:37 PM on April 8, 2008
The flickr videos seem to be much higher compression quality than youtube, more like vimeo. This is good (maybe not for vimeo though).
posted by splatta at 8:37 PM on April 8, 2008
Mullingitover: Really? I think that they're doing a lot of innovative stuff, especially with regard to geotagging. What features are you seeing on other sites that you wish you were seeing on Flickr?
posted by JDHarper at 8:40 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by JDHarper at 8:40 PM on April 8, 2008
Now there's three places I'll need to upload my vacation videos.
posted by smackfu at 8:43 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by smackfu at 8:43 PM on April 8, 2008
Very, very nice. I can take videos with my digital camera, and I've always wanted to be able to upload them along with my photos. And now I can! Or, at least, I can upload them if they are less then 90 seconds long.
The video quality is great, also.
I'm kind of surprised that flickr is doing this. I mean, there aren't any real barriers to already posting videos on youtube, are there? I'm not so sure the internet needs another venue for home videos.
Yeah, but I already have hundreds of photos on flickr, and people who are intrested in my photos will now get a chance to view any videos I put up. The only thing I use my youtube account for is favorites and playlists.
Another important point: There is no porn on youtube, but there is porn on flickr.
posted by delmoi at 8:48 PM on April 8, 2008
The video quality is great, also.
I'm kind of surprised that flickr is doing this. I mean, there aren't any real barriers to already posting videos on youtube, are there? I'm not so sure the internet needs another venue for home videos.
Yeah, but I already have hundreds of photos on flickr, and people who are intrested in my photos will now get a chance to view any videos I put up. The only thing I use my youtube account for is favorites and playlists.
Another important point: There is no porn on youtube, but there is porn on flickr.
posted by delmoi at 8:48 PM on April 8, 2008
Could the real innovation just be that flickr will provide users a way to distribute videos to only people on their friends list, while youtube doesn't provide such selective displays?
posted by Dave Faris at 8:51 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by Dave Faris at 8:51 PM on April 8, 2008
Does it support rotating your videos? Because I am the worst at doing that with my camera. I just forget that you're not supposed to hold it vertically, since I take a good 70% of my photos that way.
posted by smackfu at 8:53 PM on April 8, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by smackfu at 8:53 PM on April 8, 2008 [2 favorites]
pets and children... Pets And Children... PETS AND CHILDREN!!!!
Thank you flickr, I love you too.
posted by sir_rubixalot at 8:54 PM on April 8, 2008
Thank you flickr, I love you too.
posted by sir_rubixalot at 8:54 PM on April 8, 2008
Another pet peeve: Youtube makes you add metadata before you upload something, Flickr lets you do it after the fact. I'm waiting for a 3D feature now.
posted by mattbucher at 9:01 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by mattbucher at 9:01 PM on April 8, 2008
The time limit is a great idea.
"90 Second Theater" could be a great group on Flickr but a 90 second limit on all uploads? What you call an idea I call a limitation.
posted by paddysat at 9:14 PM on April 8, 2008
"90 Second Theater" could be a great group on Flickr but a 90 second limit on all uploads? What you call an idea I call a limitation.
posted by paddysat at 9:14 PM on April 8, 2008
Oh...and I love Flickr. Just don't think the video is all that.
Yet.
posted by paddysat at 9:15 PM on April 8, 2008
Yet.
posted by paddysat at 9:15 PM on April 8, 2008
JDHarper writes "Mullingitover: Really? I think that they're doing a lot of innovative stuff, especially with regard to geotagging. What features are you seeing on other sites that you wish you were seeing on Flickr?"
Geotagging is tedious GPS isn't a standard feature on any camera I know of. For years I was hoping they'd do video and blow YouTube out of the water, but I gave up on the idea and though they were going to be a purist photo site. For them to rip off Vimeo's player so blatantly and then hobble it with a 90-second limit and say "It's a feature!" is just sad.
Don't get me started on the fact that they're going to be part of Microsoft soon. You know what feature I want from them in the future? Them getting spun off before the merger. That, or a convenient export feature for my photo library.
posted by mullingitover at 9:16 PM on April 8, 2008
Geotagging is tedious GPS isn't a standard feature on any camera I know of. For years I was hoping they'd do video and blow YouTube out of the water, but I gave up on the idea and though they were going to be a purist photo site. For them to rip off Vimeo's player so blatantly and then hobble it with a 90-second limit and say "It's a feature!" is just sad.
Don't get me started on the fact that they're going to be part of Microsoft soon. You know what feature I want from them in the future? Them getting spun off before the merger. That, or a convenient export feature for my photo library.
posted by mullingitover at 9:16 PM on April 8, 2008
It's funny that they seem to have gone down the list "popular bloggers" and given them beta access. I saw a bunch of posts from all over pop up in the last few hours. Gotta generate that hype!
posted by smackfu at 9:22 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by smackfu at 9:22 PM on April 8, 2008
Paddysat: Sometimes limitations are what make a product great. Having no limit to the length of videos means having tons of people uploading full movies, television episodes, lectures, screencasts, home made movies, etc. That would be a copyright nightmare for Flickr to have to deal with, and it would also dilutes the quality of videos (or signal:noise ratio interesting/original content). By doing a 90 second limit, they can skirt both that issue as well as focus on allowing users to upload videos that are succinct, interesting, and original.
At least, that's the hope anyways. We'll have to see how it plays out. Given the awesomeness of flickr's existing community, I'm certainly optimistic.
posted by patr1ck at 9:22 PM on April 8, 2008
At least, that's the hope anyways. We'll have to see how it plays out. Given the awesomeness of flickr's existing community, I'm certainly optimistic.
posted by patr1ck at 9:22 PM on April 8, 2008
This is great. I don't want to post webcamwhore rants, staged teh LOL clips, or video created by other people. "Long photos" is exactly what the video clips from my camera are. If flickr gets a few decent attempts at ninety-second art films, so much the better.
I'm sure there will be plenty of crap posted, but it will be of a different variety than YouTube.
posted by D.C. at 9:32 PM on April 8, 2008
I'm sure there will be plenty of crap posted, but it will be of a different variety than YouTube.
posted by D.C. at 9:32 PM on April 8, 2008
Having no limit to the length of videos means having tons of people uploading full movies, television episodes, lectures, screencasts, home made movies, etc. That would be a copyright nightmare for Flickr to have to deal with, and it would also dilutes the quality of videos (or signal:noise ratio interesting/original content).
Vimeo avoids all those problems without the 90 second limit. (Except maybe for the home made movies which I really like.)
posted by paddysat at 9:39 PM on April 8, 2008
Vimeo avoids all those problems without the 90 second limit. (Except maybe for the home made movies which I really like.)
posted by paddysat at 9:39 PM on April 8, 2008
I think that if you allow unlimited videos, you beg comparisons with YouTube and Mimeo and all those other sites; if you limit to 90 seconds, you get a quick wash of "oh, this isn't useful for stuff that YouTube and Mimeo and all those other sites do" and everyone moves on -- and then Flickr users realize they can post their little cell phone videos now, and everyone's happy.
I might be biased, though.
posted by davejay at 9:52 PM on April 8, 2008
I might be biased, though.
posted by davejay at 9:52 PM on April 8, 2008
So who's going to make the first one-link flickr video post?
posted by Bugg at 10:11 PM on April 8, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by Bugg at 10:11 PM on April 8, 2008 [2 favorites]
This is a good thing for me; all our family are on Flickr, so we take the opportunity to post hundreds of pictures of our son running around the yard in his birthday suit, on private mode, for them to check out. However, no video sharing site has both the penetration (in terms of people I know who are active members) and security of Flickr. Finally I can share some videos of our son running around the yard in his birthday suit with the family!
posted by Jimbob at 10:13 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by Jimbob at 10:13 PM on April 8, 2008
I am very excited. This will work for something I've been recently planning to do, which is have videos used as extended photographs, sort of like the "soundscapes" people take of some areas. It'd go great with the photos I'd take at the same place.
I just hope this'll work on my wordpress blog.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 10:13 PM on April 8, 2008
I just hope this'll work on my wordpress blog.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 10:13 PM on April 8, 2008
delmoi: There is no porn on youtube
Haaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha.
Are you serious??
Clearly you haven't even bothered to look.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 10:16 PM on April 8, 2008
Haaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha.
Are you serious??
Clearly you haven't even bothered to look.
posted by CitrusFreak12 at 10:16 PM on April 8, 2008
I've wanted this for a long time. There's been plenty of times I've wanted to upload short video clips from trips - friends soaring off ski jumps, neat cooking demos in foreign restaurants and street vendors, short screencasts - and wanted it inline with the photos in a Flickr photo set.
posted by junesix at 10:24 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by junesix at 10:24 PM on April 8, 2008
With respect to having users pre-filter what gets posted, that gives Flickr a unique advantage over the more "democratic" YouTube, I'd think.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:00 PM on April 8, 2008
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:00 PM on April 8, 2008
This is very cool. I'm comfortable with the 90 sec limitation also; if they want to compete with YouTube on longer videos (full-length home movies, TV episodes, etc.), that should go on a separate site, not Flickr. However, being able to upload short clips along with my photos is pretty neat.
I have a bunch of videos sitting around that I took at the same time as photosets that are on Flickr, but I haven't had a good way of sharing them. They don't really stand by themselves to the point where I felt like they were worth posting on YouTube, but as part of a set with still photos I think they'd add something.
Now I'll have to dig them out of wherever they're languishing in iPhoto...
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:23 PM on April 8, 2008
I have a bunch of videos sitting around that I took at the same time as photosets that are on Flickr, but I haven't had a good way of sharing them. They don't really stand by themselves to the point where I felt like they were worth posting on YouTube, but as part of a set with still photos I think they'd add something.
Now I'll have to dig them out of wherever they're languishing in iPhoto...
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:23 PM on April 8, 2008
JDHarper writes "What features are you seeing on other sites that you wish you were seeing on Flickr?"
Sorry for my prior griping, I really love flickr or I wouldn't have nearly 6,000 pictures there. However, one more I forgot that's been bugging me for a long time: "Contacts/Friends in common" when you view profile pages. This is a glaring omission in a social site.
posted by mullingitover at 12:54 AM on April 9, 2008
Sorry for my prior griping, I really love flickr or I wouldn't have nearly 6,000 pictures there. However, one more I forgot that's been bugging me for a long time: "Contacts/Friends in common" when you view profile pages. This is a glaring omission in a social site.
posted by mullingitover at 12:54 AM on April 9, 2008
CitrusFreak12 wrote: I am very excited. This will work for something I've been recently planning to do, which is have videos used as extended photographs, sort of like the "soundscapes" people take of some areas. It'd go great with the photos I'd take at the same place.
That was my first thought too: the idea of the 'long photo' as something akin to soundscapes is really attractive, I think. As is micro-documentary stuff, like this film of oil riggers at work. (Of course, it does all feel like spin for an arbitrary limit on file size, but that doesn't mean the constraint won't produce interesting work in what you can just about call a new genre.)
Also, 90 seconds is enough time for cinema worth watching - eg. the recent Ballardian Home Movies contest.
posted by jack_mo at 3:21 AM on April 9, 2008
That was my first thought too: the idea of the 'long photo' as something akin to soundscapes is really attractive, I think. As is micro-documentary stuff, like this film of oil riggers at work. (Of course, it does all feel like spin for an arbitrary limit on file size, but that doesn't mean the constraint won't produce interesting work in what you can just about call a new genre.)
Also, 90 seconds is enough time for cinema worth watching - eg. the recent Ballardian Home Movies contest.
posted by jack_mo at 3:21 AM on April 9, 2008
flatluigi, thank you for that.
My first test post worked flawlessly - now to stalk the cat with the movie camera.
(that's a Flickr in-joke...cats, sunsets and flower macros...you had to be there)
posted by sidereal at 3:48 AM on April 9, 2008
My first test post worked flawlessly - now to stalk the cat with the movie camera.
(that's a Flickr in-joke...cats, sunsets and flower macros...you had to be there)
posted by sidereal at 3:48 AM on April 9, 2008
It's funny that they seem to have gone down the list "popular bloggers" and given them beta access. I saw a bunch of posts from all over pop up in the last few hours. Gotta generate that hype!
Anyone who's a pro flickr user has access, and most of them aren't popular bloggers.
posted by zarah at 3:59 AM on April 9, 2008
Anyone who's a pro flickr user has access, and most of them aren't popular bloggers.
posted by zarah at 3:59 AM on April 9, 2008
Dave Faris: "I'm kind of surprised that flickr is doing this. I mean, there aren't any real barriers to already posting videos on youtube, are there? I'm not so sure the internet needs another venue for home videos."
This is exactly what I need in a video hosting site. I don't make slick edited videos, and I don't like the de-personalization of YouTube. I want to post fourty-second "long photos" of my wife sledding and have them take advantage of my friend network and the sets and groups and simple commenting structure of Flickr, as well as the RSS feeds all of my friends already have subscribed.
This is exactly how I take videos, and it's exactly where I want it to be. Huzza for Flickr.
posted by Plutor at 4:29 AM on April 9, 2008
This is exactly what I need in a video hosting site. I don't make slick edited videos, and I don't like the de-personalization of YouTube. I want to post fourty-second "long photos" of my wife sledding and have them take advantage of my friend network and the sets and groups and simple commenting structure of Flickr, as well as the RSS feeds all of my friends already have subscribed.
This is exactly how I take videos, and it's exactly where I want it to be. Huzza for Flickr.
posted by Plutor at 4:29 AM on April 9, 2008
this is terribly disappointing to me. I store a lot of super-high-res photos in my account and would have loved to expand this to full-resolution video storage but it seems I will keep on having to pay for another service to do that (which I do).
I realize there are bazillions of mom-and-pop users on flickr but this does nothing for the pro community, which I speculate is the audience that spends the most time on their site.
posted by krautland at 4:44 AM on April 9, 2008
I realize there are bazillions of mom-and-pop users on flickr but this does nothing for the pro community, which I speculate is the audience that spends the most time on their site.
posted by krautland at 4:44 AM on April 9, 2008
I think that the 90 second limit is a great idea. Youtube videos usually suffer from a lack of editting, taking two or three minutes to get to the point. This forces uploaders to show only the important bits of their video.
posted by JDHarper at 5:23 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by JDHarper at 5:23 AM on April 9, 2008
Your favorite thing has a new thing. FlickrVideo @ 11.
posted by Eideteker at 5:25 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by Eideteker at 5:25 AM on April 9, 2008
Hooray!
There has been exactly 1 time I've needed to upload a video to flickr, and now I have!
Happy monkey at the moment.
posted by flippant at 5:48 AM on April 9, 2008
There has been exactly 1 time I've needed to upload a video to flickr, and now I have!
Happy monkey at the moment.
posted by flippant at 5:48 AM on April 9, 2008
Anyone who's a pro flickr user has access, and most of them aren't popular bloggers.
I meant stuff like this from kottke: "Flickr users can now upload video to their accounts. I uploaded a video during the beta test".
posted by smackfu at 6:01 AM on April 9, 2008
I meant stuff like this from kottke: "Flickr users can now upload video to their accounts. I uploaded a video during the beta test".
posted by smackfu at 6:01 AM on April 9, 2008
Plutor : my wife sledding
The anticipation was killing me!
Yeah, since they're not charging more money for the privilege, there's no reason to complain. I was just having trouble seeing the point. But then, what's the point of people uploading their umpteenth cat picture or flower macro shot? (Guilty as charged.)
posted by Dave Faris at 6:14 AM on April 9, 2008
The anticipation was killing me!
Yeah, since they're not charging more money for the privilege, there's no reason to complain. I was just having trouble seeing the point. But then, what's the point of people uploading their umpteenth cat picture or flower macro shot? (Guilty as charged.)
posted by Dave Faris at 6:14 AM on April 9, 2008
I guess this might be the last reason I should move to a Pro account. I don't mean the last reason on earth; I mean this would be the reason, in addition to the others, that helps seal the deal.
Damn you, Flickr!
posted by grubi at 6:17 AM on April 9, 2008
Damn you, Flickr!
posted by grubi at 6:17 AM on April 9, 2008
I like the community aspect of flickr and assume that most of the videos will be a bit more personal compared to the "throw it all out there" aspect of YouTube. With that said, I'm also sure that I won't be interested in the majority of what get's posted (much like the photos) - but there should be some real gems if you're patient and willing to dig.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:29 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:29 AM on April 9, 2008
Some flickr users disagree
Flickr users bitching and whining? Now that is news! Oh no wait, I have it backwards. Flickr has to have one of the most annoying user bases on the web. I've lost count of the number of times the Flickr Admin team have been compared to the Nazis. The mother fucking Nazis.
posted by chunking express at 8:03 AM on April 9, 2008
Flickr users bitching and whining? Now that is news! Oh no wait, I have it backwards. Flickr has to have one of the most annoying user bases on the web. I've lost count of the number of times the Flickr Admin team have been compared to the Nazis. The mother fucking Nazis.
posted by chunking express at 8:03 AM on April 9, 2008
I think this is great. The thing, for me, that makes Flickr kick so much ass is that so many of my friends actually use it daily. Essentially, to have videos seamlessly plopped into the photo/user streams that I already check all the time, and to have the ability to plop videos into the photostream that I know my friends already see? It's great.
Vimeo is cool because the compression algorithm and UI is good, but it looks like Flickr is just as good on both counts AND has a HUGE user base. I fear that Vimeo might be smooshed. Youtube is good only for size and ubiquity - it's a nightmare in every usability respect, but I doubt this will smoosh it.
Yay Flickr!
posted by dirtdirt at 8:07 AM on April 9, 2008
Vimeo is cool because the compression algorithm and UI is good, but it looks like Flickr is just as good on both counts AND has a HUGE user base. I fear that Vimeo might be smooshed. Youtube is good only for size and ubiquity - it's a nightmare in every usability respect, but I doubt this will smoosh it.
Yay Flickr!
posted by dirtdirt at 8:07 AM on April 9, 2008
This is a great idea. I use Youtube as well, but it's nice to be able to consolidate my trip pictures, for example - with video on that trip as well.
posted by waylaid at 8:13 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by waylaid at 8:13 AM on April 9, 2008
krautland: Don't be let down yet. I wouldn't be surprised if they expand video to everyone in a month or two. Storage is so dirt cheap it's not worth charging for anymore. But Yahoo has had hiccups the last few times they launched new products, namely the unanticipated surge of traffic brought down whole sites. So I bet they're just starting out with the pro users to gauge usage of the video feature. Could you imagine if Yahoo had flipped the switch for everyone on the same day and half of their users went to Flickr to check it out and half of those uploaded 2-3 150MB videos? Flickr would be reduced to a crawl or probably knocked offline.
Once they've got a good grasp of it, they can make the proper storage and bandwidth allocation and trickle it out to everyone. Google does the same thing with their new features/product launches (Google Analytics, Google Docs Offline, Google Sites) except they selectively enable the new feature for people who log into the service a few at a time.
I'm sure this strategy must be in the cards. Yahoo needs all the goodwill it can get now and forever limiting a great new feature to just a smaller pool of paying members can't be beneficial even if it created a short-term bump in profitability.
posted by junesix at 8:35 AM on April 9, 2008
Once they've got a good grasp of it, they can make the proper storage and bandwidth allocation and trickle it out to everyone. Google does the same thing with their new features/product launches (Google Analytics, Google Docs Offline, Google Sites) except they selectively enable the new feature for people who log into the service a few at a time.
I'm sure this strategy must be in the cards. Yahoo needs all the goodwill it can get now and forever limiting a great new feature to just a smaller pool of paying members can't be beneficial even if it created a short-term bump in profitability.
posted by junesix at 8:35 AM on April 9, 2008
Long photos are looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong
posted by sidereal at 8:39 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by sidereal at 8:39 AM on April 9, 2008
The whole feature is worth it for this dog/cat interaction video.
posted by hecho de la basura at 8:58 AM on April 9, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by hecho de la basura at 8:58 AM on April 9, 2008 [3 favorites]
At this point, I like it because the WebSense blocker here at my office hasn't picked up Flickr as a "do not visit" site. Yay for timekillers!
posted by Pantengliopoli at 9:13 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by Pantengliopoli at 9:13 AM on April 9, 2008
I'm coming around to the pro-video on flickr point of view. There's little chance that something like this would even be a blip on anyone's radar had it been uploaded to youtube.
posted by Dave Faris at 9:21 AM on April 9, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by Dave Faris at 9:21 AM on April 9, 2008 [1 favorite]
I'm not incredibly thrilled about this new feature.
Part of it is that I don't have any videos to upload (it's just not my thing).
After my initial kneejerk "NOO, this is bullshit!" reaction, I now just hope that it doesn't impact the site's performance for viewing photos.
Also, I really hope that you can't embed those videos into comments. It's bad enough already with the glittery animated gifs.
posted by agress at 9:22 AM on April 9, 2008 [1 favorite]
Part of it is that I don't have any videos to upload (it's just not my thing).
After my initial kneejerk "NOO, this is bullshit!" reaction, I now just hope that it doesn't impact the site's performance for viewing photos.
Also, I really hope that you can't embed those videos into comments. It's bad enough already with the glittery animated gifs.
posted by agress at 9:22 AM on April 9, 2008 [1 favorite]
Mercifully, Flickr does not allow object or embed tags in any text submissions (description, comments, discussion threads.)
posted by sidereal at 9:47 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by sidereal at 9:47 AM on April 9, 2008
For those who don't like what flickr is doing, and simply can't live with it, I suggest an alternative ... SmugMug, especially if you are a webmaster and want to embed picture galleries into your site. It's more expensive, though.
posted by Dave Faris at 9:51 AM on April 9, 2008
posted by Dave Faris at 9:51 AM on April 9, 2008
Also, I really hope that you can't embed those videos into comments. It's bad enough already with the glittery animated gifs.
There better be a special place in Hell for people who add those gifs to their comments.
posted by paddysat at 10:24 AM on April 9, 2008
There better be a special place in Hell for people who add those gifs to their comments.
posted by paddysat at 10:24 AM on April 9, 2008
Flickr users bitching and whining? Now that is news! Oh no wait, I have it backwards. Flickr has to have one of the most annoying user bases on the web. I've lost count of the number of times the Flickr Admin team have been compared to the Nazis.
I read the Flickr forums sometimes to make myself feel better about who I am. Seeing a bunch of smart people act like pretentious asshats is a nice reminder that I'm not like them and that if I ever am like that I need to be slapped hard.
Or else, upgrade my camera.
posted by dw at 11:21 AM on April 9, 2008
I read the Flickr forums sometimes to make myself feel better about who I am. Seeing a bunch of smart people act like pretentious asshats is a nice reminder that I'm not like them and that if I ever am like that I need to be slapped hard.
Or else, upgrade my camera.
posted by dw at 11:21 AM on April 9, 2008
junesix: we can hope. I'm fairly glad they raised the upload limit on my photos to 20mb.
dw: they did some really stupid things (think bogus dmca notices resulting in deletions) and people are passionate. it was to be expected.
posted by krautland at 11:29 AM on April 9, 2008
dw: they did some really stupid things (think bogus dmca notices resulting in deletions) and people are passionate. it was to be expected.
posted by krautland at 11:29 AM on April 9, 2008
dw: they did some really stupid things (think bogus dmca notices resulting in deletions) and people are passionate. it was to be expected.
I just find it hilarious that any time Flickr does anything, even remove a break tag, it's MAN THE BARRICADES WE MUST FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM!!!
After a while, it gets silly.
posted by dw at 1:16 PM on April 9, 2008
I just find it hilarious that any time Flickr does anything, even remove a break tag, it's MAN THE BARRICADES WE MUST FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM!!!
After a while, it gets silly.
posted by dw at 1:16 PM on April 9, 2008
It gets even sillier when you read the Flickr forum substituting "Jews" for "video." Or, rather, Godwin-awesome.
posted by dw at 2:17 PM on April 9, 2008
posted by dw at 2:17 PM on April 9, 2008
I have seen people post pictures of the gates of Auschwitz in the forum, because, you know, having your picture taken down is like being gassed and then burned in an incinerator. The idiocy on Flickr is incredible.
Mind you, I quite like the site.
posted by chunking express at 2:51 PM on April 9, 2008
Mind you, I quite like the site.
posted by chunking express at 2:51 PM on April 9, 2008
It is very curious, the sense of entitlement that some users of Flickr have. I wouldn't call them idiotic, though. They're just inexplicably passionate and heavily invested in that website. The same can be said of Metafilter, to a certain degree.
posted by Dave Faris at 3:00 PM on April 9, 2008
posted by Dave Faris at 3:00 PM on April 9, 2008
I'm not sure how the video thing would work for non-paying members. The 100MB bandwidth limit is very... limiting, considering how heavy video files tend to be.
Adding a separate bandwidth limit for video files would feel arbitrary and would raise the question: Why can't I use that bandwidth for my photos if I'm not going to upload videos?
This would leave raising the bandwidth limit but that would reduce the difference between paid and free accounts which is something that I'm not sure they would want to do.
posted by Memo at 3:41 PM on April 9, 2008
Adding a separate bandwidth limit for video files would feel arbitrary and would raise the question: Why can't I use that bandwidth for my photos if I'm not going to upload videos?
This would leave raising the bandwidth limit but that would reduce the difference between paid and free accounts which is something that I'm not sure they would want to do.
posted by Memo at 3:41 PM on April 9, 2008
via BB, a nice point observation about "long photos" in koyaanisqatsi :P
cheers!
posted by kliuless at 6:00 PM on April 21, 2008 [1 favorite]
cheers!
posted by kliuless at 6:00 PM on April 21, 2008 [1 favorite]
« Older Forgiving Buckner | Internet Event Horizons Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by carter at 8:07 PM on April 8, 2008