nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

[Resolved]For all the Flickr pro users

Ricky91t

Hello all,
My flickr pro subscription recently ran out over christmas and i havn't got round to upgrading it(Probably won't)Might just move to pixie

But while i was on holiday i uploaded about 300 full res photo and set them to hidden and they're gone!Along with all but 200 of my most recent

My question is has anyone else had this issue when their pro subscription ran out?And if i get another will i get the 800 odd pics back?

Thanks all,

Not liking flickr anymore :mad:

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

AnimalRights

I take it you do remember the Buckaroo ads Covey....

Ricky91t

Hugh_C wrote: »

flickr costs about 5-and-a-quarter cent a day. I don't consider that very much.

I'd happily pay it like that,
But as you have to pay it in one go,its not as nice!
Also when i upload i have to reduce the size as i have a slow upload
So i never really make the most of it being unlimited

XLR8

Ricky91t wrote: »

They should just limit free users to 200!Pro users whether or not they re-subscribe should have an unlimited photo number in their stream(but still bandwidth/upload limit)

Are you suggesting that Flickr should allow you to upload 500 gig of photos on your pro account and then allow you to drop your pro account for a free account and retain access to 500 gig of photos?

I know storage is cheap but €20 isn't going to buy much HDD space and bandwidth... they need to make money somehow and this is how they do it.

I think Flickr are quite fair as regards free accounts and a pro account is excellent value for money.

Ricky91t

They make money from all the pro account users...
Think i'll just make the move to pixie now

Fajitas!

I'm sorry, we're talking about 25 quid being expensive, when we spend €€€€'s on camera gear?

Flickr is HUGE, it needs money to run it, as XLR mentioned, along with paying staff, and so on and so on. If someone came in here asking for professional photographer to work for free, they'd be lynched. A photographer runs a business and needs profits. Flickr is a business and needs profits.

If we're worrying about our gas, electricity and accomodation by the day, I think photography should be the last thing on our minds.

Ricky91t

Fajitas! wrote: »

I'm sorry, we're talking about 25 quid being expensive, when we spend €€€€'s on camera gear?

Flickr is HUGE, it needs money to run it, as XLR mentioned, along with paying staff, and so on and so on. If someone came in here asking for professional photographer to work for free, they'd be lynched. A photographer runs a business and needs profits. Flickr is a business and needs profits.

If we're worrying about our gas, electricity and accomodation by the day, I think photography should be the last thing on our minds.

Flickr is yahoo which is worth millions

When you're 17 have no job,can't get one,studying for the leaving cert so not enough time to get one,and trying to save for a news lens(which is failing)
€25 is alot,for me anyway

Anouilh

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

a bag of ferrets ??!?!?.

Ferrets are, traditionally, a source of humour, Mustela nivalis less so...

I really don't think there's much of an issue in all this;
each user chooses the system of upload that best meets their needs.

The idea of "Freemium" might amuse readers here for a moment, and dividing by zero has always been a problem:

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/24/free-wireds-chris-an.html

Anouilh

Ricky91t wrote: »

Flickr is yahoo which is worth millions

When you're 17 have no job,can't get one,studying for the leaving cert so not enough time to get one,and trying to save for a news lens(which is failing)
€25 is alot,for me anyway

You have a sound business sense, and prioritise well.

I overheard a conversation between some teenagers recently where what I might spend on a cup of tea and a muffin was "very expensive".

Been there...

padocon

Fajitas! wrote: »

I'm sorry, we're talking about 25 quid being expensive, when we spend €€€€'s on camera gear?

Flickr is HUGE, it needs money to run it, as XLR mentioned, along with paying staff, and so on and so on. If someone came in here asking for professional photographer to work for free, they'd be lynched. A photographer runs a business and needs profits. Flickr is a business and needs profits.

If we're worrying about our gas, electricity and accomodation by the day, I think photography should be the last thing on our minds.

How many members are on flickr?
Like 1 million in 2005 and its grown since then!
1,000,000 X 25 =25 million euro per annum!!!

Maybe they are not all Pros. But its a hell of allot of money!
I know they have to pay staff ect.

Ricky91t

There 33,512,794 users on flickr.I'd be surpised if 5% of those were pro

challengemaster

Look at the bigger picture:

Might help to remember, Flickr is owned by Yahoo, which is probably one of google's main competitors. So you're talking about a company on the same scale or slightly smaller than google.

It's not like flickr is its own entity which reaps all the profits.

Ricky91t

challengemaster wrote: »

Look at the bigger picture:

Might help to remember, Flickr is owned by Yahoo, which is probably one of google's main competitors. So you're talking about a company on the same scale or slightly smaller than google.

It's not like flickr is its own entity which reaps all the profits.

Already said flickr are owned by yahoo
I'm sure most people know about how well known yahoo is

Fajitas!

Ricky91t wrote: »

Flickr is yahoo which is worth millions

When you're 17 have no job,can't get one,studying for the leaving cert so not enough time to get one,and trying to save for a news lens(which is failing)
€25 is alot,for me anyway

Flickr is a business which needs profit.

If Flickr dosn't cut enough profit to keep itself going, and pay off to Yahoo, then it's a pointless enterprise.

In the 'grand scale' of things, 25 mil wouldn't be that huge, if you consider the terrabytes uploaded every minute!

melekalikimaka

Dear lies let's all chip in and get ricky a pro account and end this. Personally I have no problems paying for flickr, I pay for a great service and I find pix.ie rather tacky and I don't like directing people their to view images, and the group and other elements are excellent on flickr. Is there a batch up loader for pix.ie yet? Like flickr uploadr?

Ricky91t

melekalikimaka wrote: »

Dear lies let's all chip in and get ricky a pro account and end this. Personally I have no problems paying for flickr, I pay for a great service and I find pix.ie rather tacky and I don't like directing people their to view images, and the group and other elements are excellent on flickr. Is there a batch up loader for pix.ie yet? Like flickr uploadr?

I don't want that!
Cause i just see it pointless buying a flickr account for one day just to recover images,at no point in this thread did i ask for someone to buy one for me,nor did i try to hint at that,This thread was started as a rant that they deleted my photos and i was annoyed so there would be no point in "chipping in" I've already posted in the title saying this was resolved as i know they are still there

Therefore you shouldn't of posted on this and just let it go get lost in the archives

TJJP

Ricky91t wrote: »

I don't want that!
Cause i just see it pointless buying a flickr account for one day just to recover images,at no point in this thread did i ask for someone to buy one for me,nor did i try to hint at that,This thread was started as a rant that they deleted my photos and i was annoyed so there would be no point in "chipping in" I've already posted in the title saying this was resolved as i know they are still there

Good point about flickr though. I've tired of it and all the technical issues (flash and so on). Getting prints is a nuisance too. My account also expired in the last few weeks and getting images back was such a pain that I just deleted the whole lot... Where next though...

I have a pix.ie account but the interface is a bit tacky. Fuji has poor reviews, Aldi seems worse.

Snapfish looks interesting, as does putplace. Let me know if you find anything useful.

Fajitas!

Buy your own hosting?

Anouilh

While short-term problems are easy to solve in relation to photo uploading, this is a very time consuming problem for Internet users.

I stopped uploaded to Fotopic because it was so slow and long-winded. That was before I had Broadband, so I should give it another try.

It might be a useful site for you, Ricky.
The Webmasters there are really friendly and communicate very clearly through e-mail if you run into difficulties.
It was my first experience of photo upload and a lot of Irish people were using it about eight years ago, as it is based in England and seemed a bit more local.

I have never paid for any of my photo upload systems, as the few euro I save get put into filters and batteries.

Let's keep sharing?

Calina

Ricky91t wrote: »

I don't want that!
Cause i just see it pointless buying a flickr account for one day just to recover images....

I'm confused.

1) I have a flickr pro account which runs out some time in May. If I need the photos off it beforehand, I know roughly when to retrieve them before it would cost me money to do so.

2) I wouldn't need to do it anyway because every photograph I have uploaded flickr is, as far as I know, on one of my external drives.

Ricky, I realise that this is irritating for you but really the two main issues I see here are

1) you didn't plan ahead
2) you didn't read the T&Cs regarding what happened if you allowed a pro account to lapse.

In other words, rant away but to some extent, it is not Flickr's fault that you left your account lapse and that you now have to deal with the ramifications of it happening.

______________

Anouilh, I pay for Flickr services because I think they are worth it to me. It's a useful place for event-driven photographs, it's easily accessible to all and courtesy of the infrastructure behind them, their downtimes are very limited.

It's not difficult to use. You may save yourself something like 19E by not paying for the hosting and that's your prerogative. But you have no idea how much time I saved by not having to mess around using special tags to use the Yahoo search engine because there are limits on my account.

I like the pix.ie service but there are a couple of aspects of that service that I don't necessarily agree with at the moment, eg the inability to limit access to large size files and the adverts. When they go away I will cheerfully look at switching everything across from flickr but until then, the marriage of utility, usability and accessibility offered by flickr pro is the best match for my needs.

Anouilh

A very clear analysis of different aspects of Flickr.

There's no real debate in my mind. It's interesting to see that Flickr attracts so much discussion, but that, recently, has been based on the fact that part of the contract insists that photos uploaded there must not be used for commercial purposes. The ambiguity of this has exercised many photo-journalists over the past few years.

I expect the World will continue to be a place where everybody will make informed, personal decisions on what they spend their money on.

Covey

Calina wrote: »

I like the pix.ie service but there are a couple of aspects of that service that I don't necessarily agree with at the moment, eg the inability to limit access to large size files and the adverts. When they go away I will cheerfully look at switching everything across from flickr but until then, the marriage of utility, usability and accessibility offered by flickr pro is the best match for my needs.

Ditto.

Any photo hosting/sharing site that offers no protection at all for uploads has a serious flaw in my opinion.

Anouilh

In what way are photos uploaded to Pix.ie not protected?

What could happen?

Covey

Well, for instance, a lot on here upload full size photos to Flickr or elsewhere and then restrict access to low sized version for public consumption.

Thats not available in pixie, so your full size image is there for all to see or nick as the case may be.

Of course you could upload lower sized images only to Pixie, but aside from being extra work processing, defeats the usage some people here use Flickr for.

Of course all images can be nicked, but full sized high res images is the worst of all scenarios.

Anouilh

I have read that photographers are among the most paranoid people using the Internet and your post explains why this is so.

Uploading photos is one of the most hotly debated subjects I have come across and I took some weeks last year to find out how the various systems worked.

I had found that uploading my photos directly to Blogger had issues that related directly to Googles' copyright contracts, so I started using Flickr instead.

Covey

Anouilh wrote: »

I have read that photographers are among the most paranoid people using the Internet and your post explains why this is so.

Uploading photos is one of the most hotly debated subjects I have come across and I took some weeks last year to find out how the various systems worked.

I had found that uploading my photos directly to Blogger had issues that related directly to Googles' copyright contracts, so I started using Flickr instead.

In what way exactly am I paranoid?

Anouilh

Sweet Heavens!

Does everybody "here" have to think that every post is a personal attack? (I presume your question is meant in a joking manner, BTW.)

Photographers, because their work is easily reproduced and often "borrowed" by editors, tend to be, well..., more paranoid than the average chat room poster.

Here is a list of top sites for anybody wishing to start a
Photo-Blog:

http://www.thelatestone.com/most-used-website.html

Calina

Anouilh wrote: »

I have read that photographers are among the most paranoid people using the Internet and your post explains why this is so.

Anouilh, I would love to see where you get this from. Get me a link that says photographers are amongst the most paranoid people on the internet please. If you really want paranoia, there are probably a few threads in Conspiracy Theories worth looking at. In a best case scenario, check out some of the antivaccination websites.

Most people want some idea of what other people do with their photographs. A significant number of mine have wound up on people's blogs and FaceBook and Bebo profiles. They don't always ask first. Absent good manners, any photographer is going to want to protect their assets from being used without their knowledge and amongst the ways you can do this is 1) watermark the images or 2) limit access to high resolution files.

In any case, Covey's post does not explain any thing; it only highlights that he prefers to limit access to high resolution versions of his photographs to people of his choosing. I don't blame him for that given that Virgin Mobile in Australia got into trouble for mis-using a flickr photograph without an adequate model release and a 17 year old girl had to fight very hard to get her image removed from the front of an adult content DVD in the US.

Covey

Anouilh - My reply was a direct response to your question

"In what way are photos uploaded to Pix.ie not protected?

What could happen? "

I assumed yours to be a direct reply to my answer, especially as you state " and your post explains why this is so"

No I wasn't joking.

As for "Borrowing" copyright works, well in another man's parlance thats called "Stealing".

AnCatDubh

Calina wrote: »

I don't blame him for that given that Virgin Mobile in Australia got into trouble for mis-using a flickr photograph without an adequate model release and a 17 year old girl had to fight very hard to get her image removed from the front of an adult content DVD in the US.

I thought in this case it was that the original photographer was at fault for taking a photograph which they obviously were entitled to do but releasing it into a form of creative commons licence which 'legitimately' allowed Virgin Mobile's marketing company to scoop up the image off flickr and use for commercial purposes. Its been a while since I looked up the detail of the case but perhaps with no model release they were at least in some part culpable.

Yesterday, I placed an image on WikiCommons and agonised over what licence I would apply to it. There wasn't anything there that said please contact me if you want to use this image. I think I am becoming more paranoid as time passes which in my case is irrational and unfounded. Ah well.

Anouilh

Don't worry. We're all in the same boat, it seems:

http://www.kiwirant.co.nz/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6987

http://www.adidap.com/2008/10/02/38-of-photographers-are-paranoiac-poll-results/

I always use the "All Rights Reserved" licence.
Anybody who really wants to use my photos can contact me.