|
I couldn't sleep so I signed online and had an email from JPG Magazine's Editor in Chief which was sent to all it's members saying the magazine will cease to exist on January 5th. Who would have expected this?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
That was quick and rather sudden.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Their closure is not lossless.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
"Who would have expected this?"
i didn't, but a number of people predicted failure after the founders were kicked out.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Who would have expected this?
I know! Who would think it possible that a company would go under in this economic climate?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
striatic wrote after the founders were kicked out. That's when I cancelled my account.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
No viable business model.
See ya...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
sad loss, hope all the employs find more work quickly
ko-knia compared to a lot of web business its very viable after all it was sell a physical product.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Never heard of it. What is it?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
 |
tiffsterhere [deleted] says:
that sucks, sorry about that
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
An awful lot of magazines that were financially viable 12 months ago aren't now. Advertising is down at all but the most local levels (a relative in the business tells me his small-town/neighbourhood papers are fine, but everyone else is hurting for ad revenue), and magazine subscriptions are easy to cut when you're looking for household savings -- I know I've been putting off renewing a couple of them.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
There will be more photorag fold-ups coming. If you love the ones that you read now......you can help by upping your subscriptions and getting other people to do the same.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Brenda said "That's when I cancelled my account. "
Yep. Me too.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I'm of the opinion that spending makes more sense in bad economic times. If everybody starts saving their money then that makes the recesssion even worse as you put more businesses out of business. I for one intend to keep buying my lunches at the work canteen.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'm of the opinion that spending makes more sense in bad economic times.
Except when you have people spending and spending on credit cards (the savings rate last I heard in the US was something like -5%) and getting in debt so deep they have no hope of ever getting out...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'd like to help with the spending, but I need to pay off my earlier spending first -- the travel and home repair and renovation that are sitting on my line of credit. I stopped spending much on non-necessities (as we've defined them -- violin lessons for my son, for example, are a necessity; new jeans for me are not) much earlier last year: I'd rather be able to travel again than to have those things. My own use of that line of credit is symptomatic of what got us here in the first place. A healthy economy isn't one that depends on continually increasing spending levels relative to income, and that's what we had. This recession will mark, I hope, a necessary structural change, albeit at some people's expense more than others. (I'm one who might pay for it, at least to some extent -- almost all my freelance business is for publishers of books that you don't *have* to have.)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
So, it's goodbye to {Edit} all this?
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
personne.de.chandigarh edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
"spending makes more sense in bad economic times"
only if you are spending money that you have and not money that you borrow....otherwise you are just making the hole deeper and the problem worse.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Chandrigargh guy -- that was one of the pimpiest self-pimping attempts I've seen on here in a long time.
As for JPG... I used to have a subscription, but I pretty much lost all interest in the mag after they kicked out the founders. Hard to enjoy anything with such bad karma attached to it.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
How does it smell?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"I'm of the opinion that spending makes more sense in bad economic times. If everybody starts saving their money then that makes the recesssion even worse as you put more businesses out of business."
i largely disagree. generally speaking, if the economy as a whole is failing, there are systematic problems that need to be addressed.
these systematic problems can't be addressed without restructuring, and restructuring can't occur without capital.
in a debt ridden society, the only way to re-establish capital, system wide, is to save. spending only defers the inevitable.
i'm not against spending, or against economic stimulus packages meant to spur spending, but its all economic morphine. dulls the pain, gives you some time to think about what to do next, but absolutely does not solve any underlying problems. that, and too much of it makes for a junkie.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I also left JPG when the founders were booted. I was one of those saying they would not last after that bone head call. Hmmm guess I along with others were right. It was only a prediction and not a wish as I would not wish harm on any company trying to make in these times.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
43rdstreet [deleted] says:
a link was posted in the JPGMAG group with a torrent of the issues (1-15) and all the photo challenges. check it out.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Latest blog: "We have also received some interest from qualified parties who may be interested in acquiring the company so that JPG could live on."
Yeah, I offered them 1p for every 1,000,000 pixels. :/
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Fortunately I don't use lines of credit and I always pay my credit card balance in full every month. My own financial philosophy is to spend only what I can afford and buy local or support the independents as much as possible (although that's not always possible.)
The recession only underscores that capitalism as a moral framework for an economic system is bankrupt, pardon the pun.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
The recession only underscores that capitalism as a moral framework for an economic system is bankrupt, pardon the pun.
I have to disagree. It's the constant intervention by the government that causes economic failures, not true capitalism/free enterprise. Businesses come and go, but when you have government coming in and propping up ones that are otherwise not viable anymore, and consolidation of power and money in the hands of the banks instead of the people, it's a recipe for disaster.
Government creates the problems it then comes in and pretends to "fix" - instead imposing more regulations and incurring more debt, taking more of our money and taking more control.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I agree that we should not save all companies, but we also need to do what we can to protect jobs at home. In my previous life, I helped lay off over 72000 U.S. citizens. The products they were making were then made by citizens of other countries. I'm not a hard line protectionist, but letting the free market have complete control is not the way, either.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"that was one of the pimpiest self-pimping attempts I've seen on here in a long time."
In deference to the subtle, barely discernible, disapproval in your comment, that link has now been amended.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
personne.de.chandigarh edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I think I'd feel worse about this if they hadn't treated the founders of the magazine so shabbily.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"I have to disagree. It's the constant intervention by the government that causes economic failures, not true capitalism/free enterprise."
this is demonstrably false. while governments can certainly muck up a market or make things worse than they are, history is full of examples of entire markets mucking themselves up with no help from governments whatsoever.
the "true free market" is not a panacea.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
The "true free market" got us into this mess in the first place - if you take away regulation, people will tend to cheat, lie and play silly buggers to make a profit - it's astonishing that anyone thought they wouldn't.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
it's astonishing that anyone thought they wouldn't.
Its probably an Alzheimer thing.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Encouraging people to spend more to ease a recession is like encouraging someone who is bleeding to death to bleed more to save the life of the person that stabbed them in the neck.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
if you take away regulation, people will tend to cheat, lie and play silly buggers to make a profit
You think government doesn't cheat and lie? Government is made of people, most of which I've come to believe are corrupt. Self-regulation (which is what happens) is no regulation. It's like leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse. With what we have today, the power is continually being concentrated in the hands of the few at the expense of the many. Regulation doesn't affect those who know how to get around it (i.e. the major players), and only suppresses their competiton. Everybody's got their hands in someone else's pocket, and it's the People who suffer for it.
It should be up to the People to get information for themselves, and make the best decisions for themselves. With more freedom comes more competition, more innovation, more entrepreneurship. When you have too many hoops to jump through, nobody wants to take the risk and it ends up being the same ol' players in the game and no real choice for people to make.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
With what we have today, the power is continually being concentrated in the hands of the few at the expense of the many.
I'd sooner have the power concentrated in the hands of a few who've been elected rather than a few who have not.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
FlyButtafly "It should be up to the People to get information for themselves, and make the best decisions for themselves."
Yeah, right. The barter system was about as close to the free market of your dreams as you can get. Feel free to go back to the Dark Ages if you like (maybe you could be a slave or a serf) but democracy developed as a more equitable system of sharing scarce resources. True "freedom" is anarchy.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
All is not lost yet at JPG it seems.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I really enjoyed JPG. Is there anything similar that other members will be signing up for? I really liked their whole concept.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'd sooner have the power concentrated in the hands of a few who've been elected rather than a few who have not.
I'd have more confidence in those who were "elected" if the election process wasn't fraudulent in so many places, and the "elected" weren't so keen on ignoring or skirting the laws they swear to uphold.
True "freedom" is anarchy.
I don't mean anyone should be able to do anything they wish - though there are certain factions of people who do (including many judges) - but regulations !=sensible laws. People shouldn't need a law to tell them what is right and wrong - they should know and act accordingly, and the law be used to punish when someone has violated it. Unfortunately, when there is no such thing as "right" and "wrong" anymore, the government takes that job, and suddenly whomever is in control makes the rules.
edit: And true "democracy" is mob rule.
I don't want people to get the wrong idea. I'm all for rule of law. The problem is when men who disregard the law come to power, and when those who make laws do it to their own benefit and to the oppression of the people they are supposed to be serving.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
it was a sad prospect to begin with.. if you really look at it.
so is Utata
:)
just sayin
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
All is relative
As I grow older brandy taste more like medicine than hard liquor. So go figure.
Best photo magazine of all time was probably Camera Works (1903-1917). Most influential was probably Life (Magnum & ICP).
Most rare contemporary is (in my opinion) Collectors Photography magazine by Jeff Dunas
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Dunas
And in my opinion it is hard to beat CP, the interviews were super (it lasted only for about 1 ½ years) and that was sad.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'd have more confidence in those who were "elected" if the election process wasn't fraudulent in so many places, and the "elected" weren't so keen on ignoring or skirting the laws they swear to uphold.
Perhaps what is needed is for the population to vote more conscientiously. It's so easy to pass the buck when you've got responsibilities. Just sayin'....
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
It's all a crap shoot, and those who feel flickr was their ticket to photo-stardom are full-o-crap. I (yes me o'the crappy dog shots) have had images used, and far as i can tell, they said it was me. Perhaps they felt they had to cause of the crappy images ;)
I'm Kidding . About the crappy images, I have a FEW good ones ;)
BUT I'm just sayin'
stop stealing my tag line Jim
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
god you're cute
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Perhaps what is needed is for the population to vote more conscientiously.
I'd agree with that. Unfortunately, too many people are "asleep" or too preoccupied (with their own economic woes, possibly?) to have a real clue who and what they're voting for.
And then, of course, sometimes you do manage to get decent people elected and then *somehow* hundreds of votes for the opposition are suddenly "found" *cough* and the election is overturned (or the battle is so long and drawn out that the decent person finally gives up)...
Eh, it's all so messed up in so many places now, I have a hard time believing that things will get better as long as it's "business as usual".
I seem to have gotten a bit more pessimistic the last few years. :)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
JPG was such a fanstic idea and just supremly enjoyable and inspiring,at the satrt. Not only for what it was as Derek and heather baby, but for what It might have been had Derek and heather been able to keep on going.
that didn't happen so i doubt JPG ever reached it's full potential.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Heather makes a lot of annoying choices for Flickr (video, combining comments on your work with comments you've made, etc.). But Derek and Heather made JPG this great place for amateur photography. After they left there was bullshit like guest celebrity editors and everyone was a freaking pro. All the romance went out of it. Hope Derek and Heather start something up again but this time GET LAWYERS BEFORE YOU SIGN AWAY YOUR RIGHTS.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"Heather makes a lot of annoying choices for Flickr (video, combining comments on your work with comments you've made, etc.)."
on what do you base your insinuation that these were choices heather made?
heather is flickr's community manager, not the grand poobah of flickr, and certainly not the head of flickr's development team.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
Heather is the grand poohbah of my heart.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
It's the constant intervention by the government that causes economic failures, not true capitalism/free enterprise.
So why then have your capitalist governments stepped in to rescue the banks, not to mention a number of large car manufactures etc.
Could you explain how the constant intervention by the government has caused this current economic crises?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Could you explain how the constant intervention by the government has caused this current economic crises?
or perhaps not, and we can get back to the topic of JPG mag, or something vaguely related, instead?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Never heard of it.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
So why then have your capitalist governments stepped in to rescue the banks, not to mention a number of large car manufactures etc.
The only kind of capitalism that exists in the US government is monopolistic. They step in to get more control. Everyone knows once government has a vested interest in something (though they forget it's our money they're spending) they pull the strings. It's always been that way - whomever pays the bills makes the rules.
The government has been hand-in-hand with the banking industry for decades. Anyone who can't see the economic crisis for what it is, is either willfully or negligently ignorant. Just like the Great Depression, this is just another way for the government (and bankers who run it) to consolidate power. Every time there is a "crisis" or "disaster", the government comes up with "solutions" that in reality only create further dependence on government, increases regulation (further stifling free enterprise) and siphoning away our freedoms. And people allow it, because "drastic times take drastic measures" or some crap. People put all together too much faith in their "elected" leaders.
Anyway... back to JPGMag...
When JPG lost Heather and Derek, they lost their biggest assets. With D&H at the helm, JPG seemed to be growing and expanding and becoming increasingly successful - not to mention being an awesomely cool project. I don't know if the failure to remain successful was more due to losing their creative power and vision when they left, or more due to the fallout from the way they were shoved out the door. But I have to think that the way they (those who remained at the helm) tried to erase the history of the magazine had a profound effect. I mean, you don't just kick the founders out and then pretend like they (and by extension, their contributions and heck - all the previous versions of the magazine!) never existed.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
The only kind of capitalism that exists in the US government is monopolistic.
That's a new one on me. But what I think you mean, or perhaps don't want to admit, is that what you have is socialism for the rich.
As for regulation, well that's why this mess exists. Nobody regulated the banks, just as nobody regulated Bernie Madoff, and of course both were playing the same game.
And what are these freedoms you talk of? Where is the freedom in being stuck with a mortgage that's 50% more than the value of your asset, cos at the time it was the only way you could get a roof over your head.
And what of the capitalist solution? Apparently it's borrow more money, spend more money, but where is the money to come from. Will it work? Not a chance.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
The government has been hand-in-hand with the banking industry for decades. Anyone who can't see the economic crisis for what it is, is either willfully or negligently ignorant. Just like the Great Depression, this is just another way for the government (and bankers who run it) to consolidate power.
Oh that's one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories I've ever come across by the way!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Capitalism is a cross between a Ponze scheme and a poker game. We're entering the dealing out everybody phase.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
on what do you base your insinuation that these were choices heather made?
She's the public face of the changes. If she doesn't agree with them, she should get out of the business of promoting them.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This is sad. I hope they find a buyer.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I like the videos. Therefore on the basis of my highly scientific observational study, 100% of respondents did NOT find video on annoying, and therefore it is utterly irrelevant whether Heather agreed with them or not.
And we're still on video. Christ. Even the economic rants are less boring than that.
I'm aware of the irony of making this post, yes.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
i never cared for JPEG mag... it was kind of expensive and not very informative.. but then again, thats just my opinion and one mans opinion is worth **** so.... I do love Aftercapture and Rangefinder..mostly cause they are free, about the only mag I buy now is Photoshop user.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Now comes news of a last-minute reprieve: After the magazine world, wracked by advertising losses and shuttered titles, passed on a chance to buy 8020, some Web ventures expressed interest. 8020's one remaining title, JPG, a photography magazine, will likely never see print again. Instead, 8020's potential buyers see it as another Flickr, an online community of photo enthusiasts whose work can be cheaply and efficiently exploited.
From here
Wonder what's the point...
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
Lazybug edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
"cheaply and efficiently exploited" !!!!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
8020's potential buyers see it as another Flickr.
Including Flickr - www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/05/...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
good riddance.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
Raquella~* edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
A bad idea doesn't become a good one just because it's been around for a while. Bush v. Gore is still a stupid decision.
I know what you'll say: can the supreme court's criminal theft of the executive branch really be compared to mangling video and photography? And I gotta answer: no, of course not. Video on Flickr is much worse.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Flickr, please buy JPG magazine and turn it into something great! (greater?)
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
no3rdw edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
Funny, but I always thought of JPG as kind of a ripoff of Flickr - a community of photographers that make pictures "hot" by voting, commenting and faving (Explore, anyone?). Not that there's anything wrong with that. It worked for me in issue 7.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"JPG as kind of a ripoff of Flickr "
My own experience was that on JPG one was always trying to adjust to the way that environment differed from "home", right here on flickr. flickr is more community centred around pictures and it was sort of, though not exactly, the other way around at JPG.
Besides, flickr is definitely downright addictive.
JPG, though a nice place to be at, could be done without for months at a stretch.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
personne.de.chandigarh edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
"She's the public face of the changes. If she doesn't agree with them, she should get out of the business of promoting them."
public face doesn't equal decision maker, which is what you said she was.
and she certainly wasn't the "public face" of the video change. many staff participated in the post video discussion and if i recall, the most definitive statement came from eric.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
chandigarh_guy wrote JPG, though a nice place to be at, could be done without for months at a stretch. Well, the magazine did come out several times a year. The site, to my mind, was a place to submit photos for consideration for the print magazine.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Striatic, first, I doubt Heather would agree with your assertion that "commnunity manager" doesn't include some decision-making power over how the site is organized and whether it includes video. But if you want to parse words and play lawyer, so be it. Here it is plain: I don't like what's happened to Flickr throughout Heather's association with it.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
James Petrille edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
I don't like what's happened to Flickr throughout Heather's association with it.
Being that Heather's been associated with it since like, pretty much the beginning... perhaps you shouldn't have signed on to flickr to start with.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Being that Heather's been associated with it since like, pretty much the beginning... perhaps you shouldn't have signed on to flickr to start with.
Doesn't make sense.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"I don't like what's happened to Flickr throughout Heather's association with it."
your first upload is may 2007 for crying out pete's sake!
you don't like what's happened to flickr through ... your entire time here?
it is not fair for heather to get crapped on or assigned unfair amounts of blame because she "talks to people" and is a public face. blame flickr as an entity, fine .. but to call out a specific individual for choices they didn't even make is unwarranted.
and this isn't "playing lawyer", it's sticking up for someone you've unfairly insulted with no basis.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
James Petrille wrote I don't like what's happened to Flickr throughout Heather's association with it. Wait. You joined Flickr in May 2007... so your assertion says to me that you didn't like Flickr for at least 2 years before you joined? Why did you join then?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
i think this is pretty much a textbook case of "shooting the messenger".
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
James Petrille says:
Being that Heather's been associated with it since like, pretty much the beginning... perhaps you shouldn't have signed on to flickr to start with.
-----Doesn't make sense.
best logic ever.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Flickr could grow in so many interesting directions. But moving into Video just makes it lose its identity. It's actually just a real bummer. Google would do some amazing stuff if it and not the morons at yahoo were running things. Heather is "community manager" and therefore, I'm sure, has some decision-making power. If the whole point is that she's not entirely to blame, ok, I'll go along with that. But even if she is a powerless figurehead like you make her out to be, spokespeople take shit for their boss's bad decisions. Video on Flickr is just a bad, bad, bad idea.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
James Petrille edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
"Heather is "community manager" and therefore, I'm sure, has some decision-making power."
based on what? are you privy to flickr's internal decision making structure?
all i know that flickr was considering adding video to the site even before heather came on staff, even before the yahoo! acquisition.
"But even if she is a powerless figurehead like you make her out to be, spokespeople take shit for their boss's bad decisions."
only because uninformed people like to shoot the messenger. doesn't make it right.
"If the whole point is that she's not entirely to blame, ok,"
not only were plans for video being hatched before heather came on board, heather was one of the most skeptical people on the staff regarding video and has said so publicly. if she had any influence at all on how video ended up on flickr, it could only have been in the department of limiting the nature of flickr video. ie. pro accounts only and only 90 seconds.
but of course it's easy to just take uninformed cheap shots at her because she's prominent, and an easy scapegoat. but just because it is easy, doesn't make it any less cheap.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
and calling her a powerless figurehead? saying that she has specific responsibilities [where she is certainly not powerless] does not make her a powerless figurehead.
heather has to make decisions all the time about policies for account deletion, community quidelines, editorial decisions on the flickr blog and flickr community projects like 24 hours of flickr.
saying that she isn't the ultimate decision maker and reigning queen of all things flickr is not the same as calling her a powerless figurehead. she gets enough unwarranted flack from people for the things she actually is responsible for, to catch unwarranted flack for the things she actually isn't ultimately responsible for.
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
striatic (a group admin) edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
|
only because uninformed people like to shoot the messenger. doesn't make it right.
You should do a bit of research before lecturing other people to be informed or making specious arguments like "but just because it is easy, doesn't make it any less cheap." (Really? But I always thought easy = not cheap. You're blowin' my mind, man.)
Actually, she was "thrilled" to announce it in her signed post. Thrilled! If she doesn't mean it, she should preface it by saying "Even though I sign my post below, my signature doesn't mean anything, I'm just a corporate shill who says what I'm told to say and none of me goes into my job. Now here's what the aholes at Yahoo told me to say!"
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
James Petrille edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
Wow.... I went away on vacation to return to find that Flickr's new alternate revenue stream is me sitting in a dunking booth. How much are the tosses going for?
James, I'm sorry that you've not warmed to video on Flickr. stri is correct in that that I was very against it (it think I might have said something like "over my dead body" to Stewart back when I first joined the team in 2005), but then I was given a camera that takes video and understand the power of long potos.
I think that the integration has disproved the "flube" notion and what people are sharing is just another tool to share their personal stories. Personally, I've seen some wonderful things in video on Flickr that I would have neve had a chance to experience.
Otherwise, I don't know who Mr. Arrington has been talking to, but we (Flickr) are not and never have been interested in bidding on JPG. One shouldn't believe everything one reads on teh internets.
[I work for Flickr]
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Hey, I didn't mean to dump on you. And I hope you feel vindicated by what happened to Jpg, they treated you very poorly.
I just think you (we!) should be growing in other ways. Different sizes. Different homepage layouts. Other ways for members to interact. BUT NOT DIFFERENT MEDIUMS!
I'm a real big fan of Flickr but video is still a mistake. It was then, it is now, it will be five years from now.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
just because someone likes something doesn't meant the choice is theirs.
i was thrilled to see video on flickr, but that doesn't mean i had anything to do with it. i'm sure heather was thrilled too, legitimately. she's uploaded a lot of videos since it came out on flickr. some of them are pretty interesting and fun. doesn't mean she wasn't skeptical. certainly doesn't mean she's "responsible" for what has turned out to be a totally benign flickr feature, largely due to imposed limits on the nature of flickr video that heather was also thrilled by.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
oh. heather.
hi. : ]
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I just think you (we!) should be growing in other ways. Different sizes. Different homepage layouts. Other ways for members to interact. BUT NOT DIFFERENT MEDIUMS!
Then I think you'll be presently surprised this year. And that's all I will say on that matter.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
*deciding whether to believe Heather, since she said it on teh Internets* :)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
*speculates...
Does it involve 3-D glasses? Visual implants? Literature? Music?
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
Яick Harris edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
said: Then I think you'll be presently surprised this year. And that's all I will say on that matter.
Can we throw in "a larger variety of donuts" too?
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Mendhak wrote:
"Their closure is not lossless."
This is the best comment I have ever read
:(|)
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Wow, awesome, very cool to read. One thought: you should run it by Flickr at large, not just select members.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
One thought: you should run it by Flickr at large, not just select members.
Do you mean no beta-testing? What's the point of that? When a new feature is released, it is effectively "run...by Flickr at large". Bugs get discovered and fixed, issues come up and are resolved, sometimes changes are implemented. But there's no reason to *not* run it by "select members" first...
And if by this you mean to infer that had Flickr just dropped video into the laps of all its members at the same time (I really can't believe this is even an issue being discussed anymore), and a portion of said members revolted as they did (revoltingly I might add), that it might've changed Flickr's mind and they'd have scrapped video... well you're just plain wrong. (Wow. That's about the longest sentence I think I've ever written.)
Originally posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 53 months ago.
|
|
I don't like what's happened to Flickr throughout Heather's association with it.
(pause in disbelief).
bwah ha ha ha ha ha. that was awesome.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I did in another thread give my opinion about tech crunch. Then I follow the washington post link to find it is a tech crunch article. As Heather noted above One shouldn't believe everything one reads on teh internets. how true! btw I work for walmart, but I respect Heather. I do not take one slice of tech crunch info to be fact and keep finding biased flaws in allot of their information...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"One thought: you should run it by Flickr at large, not just select members."
i think there's some bizarre impression that people beta-testing flickr video somehow got influence in terms of whether it came out or not, or over its nature or features.
you know what we actually *did* in that group?
well what i did was upload videos in portrait orientation until the developers figured out how to properly display them.
and upload videos using bizarre codecs in an attempt to make flickr's transcoder do weird things.
other people went around doing similar things, trying to find examples where videos were called "photos" inappropriately.
some parts of the site weren't styled correctly, so the "play" arrow wasn't sitting on top of the photo, and so people found those and reported them.
this wasn't some inner circle of "favoured members" who got any kind of extra special input into the fundamental nature of the new features. the beta group was mostly filled with the kind of help forum nerds who happen to know some of the more arcane areas and settings of the site to find such problems. i recall a number of "anti-video" help forum nerds in the group too.
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
My experience with beta-testing has been to try to make the app fail then give feedback. Is that not what beta-testers do?
I still also say tech crunch is biased..
just mho..
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
pacdog rules!
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I have been meaning....
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Too say...
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
JakeRome is my best friend on flickr..
wait..
*sends JPG mag crew some tasty donuts*
Posted 53 months ago.
(permalink)
|
FlickrCentral /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to FlickrCentral discussion threads