Fine Art America - Art - Prints - Canvas Prints - Framed Prints - Metal Prints - Acrylic Prints

Every purchase includes a money-back guarantee.

312-238-9009

CART

SHOP

SELL

CREATE

LIMITED

TOUR

Fine Art Discussions

Keyword Search  | Main Menu

Search Discussions

 

Big Flickr Update...

Posted by: Matti Ollikainen on 05/20/2013 - 9:30 PM

 

Oldest Reply

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/20/2013 - 9:32 PM

Oh yeah! just what you want to do with your images - full resolution - you are planning to give your work away - that's cool.

 

Posted by: Dean Harte on 05/20/2013 - 9:40 PM

I don't know - sounds a bit too good to be true. Providing there are no catches, flickr may become a better tool for advertising work.

@Roy - you don't have to upload full resolution and can also always add a watermark. If this helps to better display work on fancy retina screens it may help to sell work. LIke I said though, Im skeptical and wondering if there is a catch somewhere. Like flickr selling your work and only giving you peanuts in return.

 

Posted by: Rebecca Sherman on 05/20/2013 - 9:45 PM

I use Flickr. I think the changes make it look fantastic and showcase the art much better. Flickr doesn't do the selling. I have had hits on my AW from Flickr show up in my analytics.

 

Posted by: Bradford Martin on 05/20/2013 - 9:45 PM

One more reason I avoid Flickr. I guess if it's watermarked that's OK. I never put anything up there that I am looking to sell. I like Google search results for images to lead here, not Flickr.

 

Posted by: Mike Savad on 05/20/2013 - 9:50 PM

yahoo owns flickr now, they want to buy tumblr. they killed geocities because they wanted to cash in. it's really hard to remove images from flickr, you have jump through hoops to get your image out of that place. now they want huge images - yeah sure. i wonder what their real plans are with these images.

though much hasn't really changed, people have been uploading full size images there for years.


---Mike Savad

 

Posted by: Heather Applegate on 05/20/2013 - 9:52 PM

They did buy Tumblr, done deal. We'll see what comes of it, but I'm guessing all they'll do is add a bunch of ads to Tumblr for now. Annoying. I like Tumblr as is!

 

Posted by: Rebecca Sherman on 05/20/2013 - 9:53 PM

I add links to my for sale photos, and I get clicks from them.

"it's really hard to remove images" ? It's called "Delete".

 

Posted by: Joann Vitali on 05/20/2013 - 9:54 PM

I used to use Flickr a while back and still have an account there. The new layout looks pretty good...far better than the boring one they had. Maybe I'l start uploading a bit and see where it goes. I have gotten a few leads from them in the past. No way going to upload full-res though.

 

Posted by: Mike Savad on 05/20/2013 - 9:57 PM

the images i want to remove there - i didn't put them there. stolen and modified images. it's like 10 step process to remove the stuff.

i use flickr to decide where to go on vacation.

---Mike Savad

 

Posted by: Rebecca Sherman on 05/20/2013 - 10:03 PM

That makes more sense. Yeah. You do have to prove they're yours.

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/20/2013 - 10:09 PM

I have 3 flikr accounts - the free ones from the "good ol' days". I seldom visit them - they are all low res - wish I had saved them in high res, as some cannot be repeated

North Carolina shots

http://www.flickr.com/photos/royde/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rde/

I had to go hunt up the links.

I thought there were 4: Florida Shots

 

Posted by: Mike Savad on 05/20/2013 - 10:13 PM

and i did, i gave them the link to my store and so forth, but they have this long procedure and it just made it much harder. right now i commented on the work to see if they will just remove it on their own. otherwise i'll have to contact the each of them. it's amazing how many are there - with my name. one even shoved it into a college - they gave credit, but didn't ask permission.


i have a few that i sent there years ago but never liked it. it was hard to use, hard to submit to groups, etc. and didn't get much out of it.

---Mike Savad

 

Posted by: Rebecca Sherman on 05/20/2013 - 10:20 PM

You're so popular Mike. You should be rich by now. :)

Roy, I started in 2007 using them as a way to archive my photos, and the ones I did upload in lower resolution, I wished were high when I ruined the discs I had burned them to. Now it's not so much to archive, but I like being able to share the garden shots and things like the museum trip I took this weekend, in addition to the things I want to sell here.

 

Posted by: Mike Savad on 05/20/2013 - 10:21 PM

well, if i had a nickel for every image stolen, i could probably buy a car.


---Mike Savad

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/20/2013 - 10:24 PM

Rebecca - I gave up on flickr when I decided I would try to sell my photo's rather than just show them off. I'm still amazed at some of the shots - taken with a point and shoot Nikon cool pix. and some taken later with a "better" Nikon. I don't even know if I remember or know where my passwords are to modify these or to try and add a link to here on FAA.

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/20/2013 - 10:24 PM

Mike - for me it would probably have to be about 50,000 each one stolen - so far - I've not found anything "stolen".

 

Posted by: Greg Jackson on 05/21/2013 - 12:33 AM

Just checked it out, and I like it. Everyone gets a free 1TB of storage space. I have 122 very low-res images there at the moment and I found they have sliding bar that shows how much you've used. Cut and paste of my current useage over there: Using 0.0024% of 1TB . I used to have a few of mine for sale over there using the Getty thing bit I clicked it Off when they did their recent image taking ordeal. The new site now has an actual full screen button to click on, and it does go to a complete full screen. Even some of my low-res stuff looked good at full screen.

 

Posted by: Brian Wallace on 05/21/2013 - 1:28 AM

I read an article recently that said Flickr was declining, until a new CEO (female) took it over and is reviving the site back to the popularity it had in the earlier years. I've gotten job offers, and exposure through requests for my pictures in books, magazines, tour guides, museum flyers, and even collage thesis. For the last two years, one of my images has been selected from my Flickr site to be used on the cover of our local phone directory. They paid more than my FAA sales combined.

BTW, you could always upload High Res images if you chose to... that's nothing new. As mentioned, just because they are now telling you that you can do that doesn't mean you have to. Yes, there are people from all parts of the world that will steal your image. That's nothing new either. That's the chance you take when you put an image on a web site. Since I started earnestly producing higher res images for FAA, the pics I put on Flickr are lower resolution just in case someone takes them. If you put them on there, your image is copyrighted.

When someone faves an image I look them up on Flickr to check them out. If they seem to be a perv or don't have any of their own images there, I consider them suspect and block them. They won't be able to see my image.

There's an "artist" on Flickr that faves a lot of my images along with thousands of others. I'm guessing he uses them as a resource for his art. Even if he changes the image composition from the original picture, something just seems wrong to me if that's indeed what he's doing.

You have a lot of edit ability in Flickr to block your image in specific ways and to block people you think are suspect. I also think their search engine is much better overall than here.

 

Posted by: Dan Carmichael on 05/21/2013 - 10:25 AM

This one made me literally laugh out loud.

It has gone past the frustrating and ridiculous, and has become laughable.

People and organizations and companies are getting scummier by the moment.

Labeled as a "Better and brigher" Flickr, it is nothing less that another image grab.

The boldness that organizations do stuff like this with is breathtaking.

But the reason they do it is simple and understandable.

Like the photo contests with terms that clearly state they own your picture simply by submitting it, there are millions of clueless people out there that blindly cooperate.

 

Posted by: Greg Jackson on 05/21/2013 - 10:44 AM

"...When someone faves an image I look them up on Flickr to check them out. If they seem to be a perv or don't have any of their own images there, I consider them suspect and block them. They won't be able to see my image. ..."



Ditto on the blocking. There seem to be those who like to favorite other peoples images, but have none of their own displayed. I've also seen it over at 500px.

 

Posted by: John Ayo on 05/21/2013 - 10:50 AM

That's one big Flickn' update.

 

Posted by: Chris Scroggins on 05/21/2013 - 12:29 PM

 

Posted by: Greg Jackson on 05/21/2013 - 12:58 PM

Flickr used to have the option to have image metadata visible or not visible to viewers. I'll have to go check to see if all metadata has been stripped as the article states.

 

Posted by: Gary De Capua on 05/21/2013 - 1:01 PM

I like the new Flicker, it's bigger, brighter and shows your work better: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gary_decapua/

 

Posted by: Mark Tisdale on 05/21/2013 - 1:13 PM

The guy who wrote the article is talking about the metadata in the re-sized images that Flickr shows the viewer, not on the screen adjacent to the image.

I.E. like here on FAA if someone downloads the 900 px version there's no metadata in the image to show where it came from or help find the owner even if it was there in the original file....

But it's not new, Flickr hasn't had metadata in the re-sized images for years either. here's a post in the forums at flickr from a couple of years ago where they "fixed" a bug where some images retained their metadata when they didn't intend them to! You can't be more purposeful than that in stripping metadata.

http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157627864674333/

 

Posted by: Arthur Dodd on 05/21/2013 - 4:32 PM

Holey moley, did flickr change! While reading this discussion, I logged into Flickr (been there about 4 years and currently have over 2,000 photos on it). This changed overnight; I was on Flickr late yesterday uploading a couple of photos. Most of what I have on Flickr is there for a certain group (client) to download as they like, so copyright is not an issue. I also have some of the same photos on Flickr as I have on FAA and Facebook. These have watermarks (on Flickr and Facebook).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/artdodd52/

I do like the clarity and brightness. But navigation is significantly different.

 

Posted by: Brian Wallace on 05/21/2013 - 5:30 PM

I do a lot of 3D stereo work including Anaglyphs. An anaglyph is a combination of two images captured from slightly different perspectives. 3D stereo glasses (usually with red/cyan filters) are required to perceive depth. They view much better on Flickr and even Facebook than they do here on FAA. I expressed my concern to FAA admin and wondered if it had something to do with the color space used on FAA because of harsher ghosting when viewed. Another FAA member also inquired as she became interested in the format after seeing some of my 3D images. Beth (alias "Abbie"), said it would be passed on to Sean. I have yet to receive a response.

Flickr has a multitude of "groups" for just about any conceivable subject. One time I helped answer some questions a lady had on Flickr and to my surprise, she paid for my next year's subscription!

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/21/2013 - 6:22 PM

Ok, I spent a few minutes over at Flickr. added a couple of images - couldn't figure out how else to add my www.rdEricksonfineart.com link - as I didn't see, couldn't find, anything like a profile. The old pictures can stay - I uploaded one - they are small and if you try to manipulate them at all - they pixelate. I suppose if you needed a post card - but they are all clearly marked © - except the new ones that are watermarked.

 

Posted by: Phyllis Wolf on 05/21/2013 - 6:26 PM

It looks good, anyway. I like the collage grouping where several can be seen before scrolling.

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/21/2013 - 6:28 PM

I have found Flickr SOOOOOOOoooooooooo slow! I could only upload one image, low res, at a a time. Now I'm trying to figure out how to edit all the pics, remove some

 

Posted by: Arthur Dodd on 05/21/2013 - 8:00 PM

Roy: when you're logged into Flickr, on your home view/page, you'll see three dots on the right of the menu bar that says "Photostream Sets Favorites Edit". Hover your mouse cursor over them and a menu pops up. Profile is sixth from the top.

 

Posted by: Thomas Schoeller on 05/21/2013 - 8:28 PM

For those in question, don't confuse Flickr's seemingly new "we fixed it' attitude for uploading hi-res images. You ALWAYS had that option for starters, and secondly as a Flickr Pro account you could disable right clicks and max out the viewable pixel resolution. I'm not sure why they are using verb-age that implies there were issues prior to upload hi-resolution images. That was never the case.

I also highly recommend (now and old flickr) you upload only a low resolution JPG, Max wide dimension no larger than 900 px and lower the resolution to 6 or 7 in PS, and of course add a very brazen watermark to your image. If you failed to upload with a watermark, NO problem, simply EDIT your image in Aviary and you can add a text watermark that can be custom made in @ 26 fonts and any color. If you are worried about theft, simply change your images from 'public' to 'private" this way they cannot be viewed until you add a watermark.

I use PS to upload to Flickr. Takes all of 5 seconds per image. Can be done via Lightroom, and Elements.

In regards to metadata, i need to look into that further.

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/21/2013 - 8:32 PM

thanks Arthur - I went back and looked at "everything" and found it. I'd still like to 're-order' the pics in the photo stream - I presume there is a way - just ain't found that one yet - but I did start to put them in sets as they should go.

 

Posted by: Bradford Martin on 05/22/2013 - 9:11 PM

Here's a link to the live announcement the CEO made last Monday in NY. About eliminating the pro account she said .."there’s really no such thing as professional photographers anymore"

Really? I guess that is her goal to make that a reality.

http://gigaom.com/2013/05/20/flickr-gets-revamp-with-1-tb-of-storage-space-free-and-yahoo-gets-new-nyc-office/

 

Posted by: Ann Powell on 05/22/2013 - 9:25 PM

I don't understand how to get flikr images to link back to my AW. I pasted links to the images, but they changed them all to "no follow" .Doesn't that mean they are dead? When I first started there a year ago I put some links to my etsy site and got an e mail that I must remove that or my acct would be deleted. What is the point of having them on there if no one can find it if they should want to purchase?

 

Posted by: Bradford Martin on 05/22/2013 - 9:43 PM

Ann. Yes exactly.

 

Posted by: John Ayo on 05/22/2013 - 10:17 PM

rel="nofollow" in a link just tells search engines not to count it. People can still click on it.

It's been commonly used for years in user-created links, particularly those found in comments and the like, to discourage spam by limiting its utility, Facebook, for instance, puts it on all user-supplied links, such as the ones you may post to your facebook page if you have one.

 

Posted by: Roy Erickson on 05/22/2013 - 10:19 PM

I still won't use Flikr - Oh - I'll upload a couple of my images to each acct I have that have my www.rdEricksonfineart.com watermark - but that's it. Personally - it's a waste of time - about like twitter - all I get are the bots.

 

Posted by: Lara Ellis on 05/22/2013 - 10:23 PM

Really $499.00 a year for more storage? I think you could buy your own hard drive cheaper than that! Wow!

 

Posted by: Frank J Casella on 05/23/2013 - 12:33 AM


Flickr is the hub for all of my photos on the web. It has been for a couple years now. It is my cloud storage for images. It is also where I get most of my referrers to FAA. Think about it, the audience is art and photo enthusiast who buy, similar how we go out to eat for something we don't want to or can't cook ourselves. I have a lot of people who search photo topics then go to my profile and fine me on FAA. I also have a huge following of publication photobuyers looking at my work.

The new design, to answer the question to this thread, is OUTSTANDING!! Flickr = the best way to store, sort, search and share your photos online!

You can upload and download in full res, or delete them. When you download the full res ( you can download different sizes ) option you get with it all your metadata. You own your images, this is just your platform for showing them to the world. The new design has such great eye appeal I predict it will be the new photoblog game changer.

If you're on Flickr lets connect, I'll start: http://www.flickr.com/fjcps now send me your link or make me your Flickr contact and I"ll reply. We're family here, lets continue it over there. Thanks!

 

Posted by: John Ayo on 05/23/2013 - 9:30 AM

Twice, though, I've had my browser bog down after scrolling down and having flickr load more images several times. Closing the flickr tab and the facebook tab helped.

 

Posted by: JC Findley on 05/23/2013 - 10:04 AM

Question for you Flickr'ers

OK, as I see it the all rights reserved images cannot be right clicked and "borrowed" but Franks image in this example allows me to open and view it at ~2000 pixels. While I cannot right click download I can do a print screen and past it into Corel PSP in about 20 seconds.

Any worries about this?

Sell Art Online

 

Posted by: Frank J Casella on 05/23/2013 - 10:14 AM

In short: Nope.

In long: some people use a watermark, but I choose not to. That can be removed too if you really want to go through the work to do it, whether the pic is on Flickr or FAA.

The other option is not to put your images on the internet. I keep my premium images private on Flickr and share the private link with select photobuyers.

My main purpose of using the Flickr services is to make an independent backup of all my digital photos. After doing so I found out what an excellent way this is to share my photos to a wider audience. In my opinion this is by far the best photo service on the planet. Thank you Flickr.

 

Posted by: Greg Jackson on 05/23/2013 - 10:35 AM

JC,

As I posted in the other Flickr thread a moment ago:

I choose not to load hi-res images to Flickr, keeping mine small (900 or below), plus use the All Rights Reserved mode also. They might get a screen capture, but it's not gonna be real workable for anything large. At least that's the plan :) . If someone wants to purchase something (I don't see that happening at Flickr though), hopefully they'll check my profile out and find the link to my AW site.

 

Posted by: Frank J Casella on 05/23/2013 - 5:31 PM


By the way, did you see? @Yahoo CEO @marissamayer dumps G+ from @Twitter bio, has @Tumblr instead. Apologizes for Pro Photog comment.

 

Posted by: Thomas Schoeller on 05/23/2013 - 6:49 PM

LOL. Marissa took some usurious heat and deservedly so. I DON'T accept her apology however, she is no more than used toilet paper to me. As a CEO, she had plenty of time and lord knows how much $$ to pay someone to write or prepare a statement to hide how ignorant she truly is.

@ hey JC.... I just wanted to point out that you can control how large of an image file you allow the public to view on flickr. No need to allow anyone to view a 2048 px jpg. I max my images out at the smallest allowable 'max" size.

speaking generally, like may others in this thread, I've used Flickr (personally) since 2008 and it has led me right to countless clients and numerous publications. I use Google analytic s on my homepage website and can tell you the proof is right there in black and white. I have a VERY low bounce % from flickr referrals and they take their sweet ass time perusing my site. Many commercial buyers who seem happy to pay my bills use flick as one of their sources to find their photographer

 

This discussion is closed.