[babywriter]

I have 2,700 photos on Flickr. I think the part that irks me isn't the reduction of the free tier, but that they're requiring deletion of photos - either voluntarily, or involuntarily - if you don't upgrade.

That's got the potential to wreak some havoc at sites like this one. SmugMug could have just frozen everything in place - I would have been fine with that. The deletion requirement is just a jerk move, IMO.

[clackers]

Important point you make here. I don't use Flickr as an external backup although I do upload a lot of my photos there. I do however keep all my photos including raw files on my computer hard drive and backup regularly to two separate external drives. I know for complete security one should be kept away from my house, but that is a step too far for me.

Just keep one at work or a relative's house, swap them over on a weekly or monthly or whatever basis, whatever interval you can cope with if your own dwelling is robbed or burns down or whatever. Encrypt first with BitLocker or a third party product if you have concerns.

[BrianR]

Well so much for Flickr not changing.

Isn't that what the other outfit that took it over said when they took it over?

This is the faq from when smugmug acquired flickr (at least I do not believe it has been updated and is as I remember it back in April or so:

Together, SmugMug + Flickr | Frequently Asked Questions

Changes were inevitable, but the core is still essentially the same.

If flickr were to pop into existence today, people would probably be pretty ok with the idea of 1000 free photo uploads. I'm sure they considered some type of grandfathering option for people on free accounts and just opted for ripping off the band-aid in one go, possibly underestimating how angry people will be when you start charging for something they've been getting for free.

---------- Post added 11-02-18 at 12:11 AM ----------

Just keep one at work or a relative's house, swap them over on a weekly or monthly or whatever basis, whatever interval you can cope with if your own dwelling is robbed or burns down or whatever. Encrypt first with BitLocker or a third party product if you have concerns.

Yup, I keep an external drive for important stuff at my in-laws and swap out every few weeks with a second external. Additionally, I don't format my memory cards until they're backed up off-site. This way if I'm not home during the disaster, the most recent photos are probably with me.

If losing photos involved disappointing anyone other than myself, I'd be backing up offsite far more frequently.

[awscreo]

Where did you see that? I can't find it.

There was a banner up top, they said it's due to their anniversary

[Rondec]

The notice came up full page for me. I am not happy with the price, but feel that the change was inevitable. After all, Yahoo was not making money with the existing business model and a change was needed.

I was intrigued at the promise of priority exposure on Explore. Amazing that a few dollars might make my photos more interesting! Now my hope is that the public transit and train folk all have free accounts.*


Steve

* There are several enthusiast subjects that are regularly included in explore, e.g. random photos of public transit and utility vehicles, trains, airliner take-off/landing, fashion dolls, game captures, and Legos. The train and buses seem to be particularly well networked and rise on basis of views alone. Encoded spy messages? Viewbots?

If you want to get explored, you have to work at it. Become a member of different groups, actively seek out other photographers and like their photos and post your photos to several groups. I think as much as anything, it is related to how quickly others respond to your photo.

From a pentax standpoint, being a member of the "Daily" photo group here can really give your photos a boost.

To me, it was all too much work, the photos of mine that got "recognized" weren't the ones I liked the best and it was sort of weird having people I had no connection with showing up on my Flickr page to like my photo and invite it into some odd group.

[savoche]

Be careful, Dagoban, that sounds like you're doing without an off-site backup.

If you bought *two* external hard disks you can get such a thing going yourself.

Yep, sounds scary. I used two external drives for backups for a while, keeping one at work and swapping them every once in a while. But it was too cumbersome, and as the library grew I had to get larger drives. So now I'm running automated (and versioned!) off-site backups instead.

Flickr I use just as a sharing platform. And as nothing is free I'm not very upset over having to pay for the service.

Then again - if I hadn't been too lazy - I'm sure my photostream would be a lot more interesting if I deleted the most boring 2/3rds of it and got under the 1000 limit

[savoche]

done - now I'm a 'pro' and have unlimited space for $35 the first year...

And one more.

[Paul the Sunman]

And one more.

Why not wait till January 8?

[dagoban]

Be careful, Dagoban, that sounds like you're doing without an off-site backup.

If you bought *two* external hard disks you can get such a thing going yourself.

Well, actually I have duplicated all the photos in several external hard disk (five or six) along the last 11-12 years. Finally I'll do as you say. I'll recolet for all the photos and I'll buy two external hard disks only to store duplicated all the photos. Until today, Flickr was an easier solution.

Thanks for your advice.

[Jonathan Mac]

I was p*ssed off this morning when I saw this news but having read their reasoning I understand why they're doing this and applaud Smugmug for being honest and implementing a transparent and sustainable model. I have used a free account since 2011 and was not aware (or had long forgotten) the old limit of 200 photos, which didn't affect me as by the time I was using the site more it had increased to 1TB. I now have over 5000 photos on Flickr and enjoy the service they provide, so I will pony up for the pro account. I haven't done this previously because the benefits of a pro account were very few and simply not worth the extra cost, but I'm happy to see that at least the deal will be sweetened by additional positive incentives such as Adobe CC discounts, CC being something I've recently started considering.

Flickr have gotten a lot of unfair opinions in the last few years. It's a great site and it looks like Smugmug know how to get it back on track and even improve it.

Edit: I created a poll to see what people here think of the changes and see what they intend to do. Please feel to vote, I think the results will be interesting.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/32-digital-processing-software-printing/...o-account.html

[savoche]

Why not wait till January 8?

That would save me $5 and a bit (for the two months' delay), but would cost me $15 for missing the discount I get from upgrading before Nov 30th. As the $50 paid in January will last until Jan '20, and the $35 paid now will last only until Nov '19 I will have to pay $10 for those two months, and so... it turns out to cost very nearly the same either way.

But yes, the cheapest option would be to wait until the 30th. That would save you (quite literally) a couple of bucks. Knowing my own memory there is no way I would remember, so I might as well do it now - and did.

Edit: Besides, now I'm a PRO!

[Doundounba]

I wonder how they will handle people's deaths? Does my estate have to pay in perpetuity to keep my photos online? There are probably already many old accounts whose holders have passed and which will be more or less destroyed when they start actively deleting photos...

[THoog]

Flickr have gotten a lot of unfair opinions in the last few years.

I think a lot of flak came from poor support, which was a direct result of Yahoo chopping budgets and laying off staff, which was all a part of a failing business model. I know people don't like paying for something that they previously got for free, but something had to change. I also understand the frustration about images being deleted, but they are probably migrating from whatever storage Yahoo used to Amazon cloud storage (that's what SmugMug uses, apparently); if they kept everything, then they are shackled to the same failing model - paying for a lot of storage that generates no income. How upset would everyone be if the announcement was to get your stuff before they shut down forever?

wonder how they will handle people's deaths?

Yahoo/Flickr's legal stance was that the account was non-transferrable and was terminated upon notification of the owner's death. If no one informed them of the death, then a paid account would revert to a free account when the subscription ran out. SmugMug seems to be a little hazier - I saw one thread where SmugMug support seemed to think a family member could take over payments for a SmugMug account - he probably hadn't talked to the legal folks. Legal ownership of "virtual" property is still evolving.

[normhead]

Honestly, I upgraded before I had to, just because I don't really believe in "free". I have always done my best to support businesses that provide payment options I view as reasonable. If you like a service support it. I would have preferred a pay what you can model, but, I'm forgetful when it comes to paying when I can. The set payment option works better for me.

[stevebrot]

To be honest, I was not sure how many photos I have on Flickr or my total storage use, so I checked. I have been a member since 2008 and have 1,750 photos in my photostream occupying 2.45GB storage space. That is an average of 175 photos per year, obviously not a power user.


Steve