|
I've always enjoyed the friendly enviroment here on flickr as opposed to sites like youtube. I like viewing pictures only because they tell a visual story which makes your imagination run wild with thoughts. I feel video will ruin this. A picture is worth a thousand words while videos rob the imagination. Just my humble opinion.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great videos out there and I realize the hard work it takes to produce great material.
I just hope it doesn't get flooded with crappy videos and ppl who leave disrespectful comments like youtube.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
BrandonWhite edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
One thing I've seen mention a few times is video being a novelty and once it wears off the number of "silly/stupid" uploads will stop and die down... so here's my question then... if I paid for a pro account on a photography site, and they used part of said funds to pay for video development instead of fixing and enhancing the photography experience on the site, and video doesn't take off like they hope, is my money really worth further video development? I'd like to definitely see some stats on video to photo upload ratios in a month or so... if there are even 10% video uploads and 90% photo uploads, then how can those who don't want video on Flickr be in the minority? Sure I know you're not taking in account those who "don't care either way" but upload numbers do speak to the situation somewhat...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
 I agreed to the terms when I joined that flickr was a website to share your photos, arts etc. Now the terms have been changed and I disagree with video being added.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
 I never said 28,000 people are posting videos. I'm just suggesting (and only suggesting) that there are a number of users who are posting video, and that they must find it attractive to do so, else they would not be posting.
If I were to guess at many unique users are posting video, the low-ball would be 1000 (based on how many beta testers there were, which is a number below that) and the high-ball would be 5000.
But that is just a guess.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
"oh, but so is raising voice here, and we do it anyway. lol"
Oh I dunno, if peeps leave here a lil more informed bout how big business works, may help in there service purchases down the road, possibly avoid being blind-sided in the future.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
shoja3 The "etc" leaves "Things" pretty open to interpretation doesn't it?
I'm more adamantly opposed to THINGS on Flickr!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
No THINGS on Flickr!!!
I thing I'll start a group!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Haeretik if there are even 10% video uploads and 90% photo uploads,
My video content is about 15% of my stream. And I expect that ratio to remain the same; meaning, I will likely alway post around 8-9 more photos than I do video, if not more.
[edit] Wow, I cannot do math today! My video content is actually 1.5% of my stream, and the rest accordingly.
So, saying that a 90% photo upload rate means that 90% of users don't want video isn't actually accurate, given that I suspect many users will be like myself and primarily post photos rather than video.
Regardless, I'm sure the screencap or graphic art upload rate is well below the photo upload rate. Does that mean the people using Flickr for screencaps and graphics don't belong on Flickr, either?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
zyrcster edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
|
Heather did promise to review that with other Flickr Staff. I'm waiting for the revision though before I do.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
It might be my blonde roots showing but i seriously don't understand why we cant have videos as a check box next to art and screen shots and CGI. It doesn't compromise anyones stream, it just helps with the search. it doesn't compromise anything in the streams, just like it didn't compromise the art in the stream.
i'm justreally really confused why adding it like soooooo many people have asked for nicely and well thought out is out of the question.
Any ideas?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
turtlephotography Yea, I think that box needs to be there, as well.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
PayPaul - why not? Being blunt, I can afford it (hell, I already pay more a month than I give Flickr in a year for hosting that I've never got round to using; mainly because Flickr used to be so good I could never muster the energy required. This is just a much needed kick up the arse, that's all.)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
like I said, I accepted the terms when I joined!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
zyrcster: LOL, now this is where it gets fun... photos/screencaps/graphic are for all intents and purposes (and sake of simplicity) - still images... yes I understand that screencaps and illustrations make a small amount, but here's the flip side... I'm willing to bet the vast majority of screenshots and illustrations are tagged as photos... afaik you can't tag a video as a photo... I know tagged isn't the right word, but I hope you get my point - the selection that asks if it is a photo/screenshot/illustration when you upload... my main point there though was, when I signed up we had photos/illustrations/screenshots as options, I assumed my pro fee was going to further develop options and the experience for viewing/uploading those types of content... and also to say that I don't think the "small" number (28,000+?) of Flickr users who are very vocal about no video shouldn't be ignored/discounted that easily... I'm sure there are more users but it's not a big enough of an issue for them to say they don't want video... gah I should go have some coffee before I get into this anymore ;)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I think the difference between two kinds of still art, i.e. photos and other art, is far less than that between still media and video. Though I would prefer photography remain the focus of Flickr, not other still art, much less video, music or poetry.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
turtlephotography,
The reason why you won't be allowed to do exclude video has nothing to do with technical issues or the ridiculous excuse given in the Flickr response to negative feedback - as you note, with cgi and illustrations, Flickr have long been doing the very "curating" they say they don't want to do with video - and everything to do with forcing video down your throat, the better to sell the appeal of Flickr users as a pre-existing audience for wannabe videographers, Youtubers and co. Think of it in the same manner as one thinks of companies which sell mailing lists to spammers, and you won't be too far off track.
If you, I and everyone else who doesn't want this "feature" can't be forced to run into video regardless of whether or not you want to, a large part of any possible appeal of Flickr over Youtube disappears, but where the powers that be at Flickr miscalculate is in assuming that nothing they do can drive away those of us who care enough about photography on here to actually pay for their service.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Poagao "Though I would prefer photography remain the focus of Flickr"
Hee! Hee! Focus! Focus!
I love word puns!
Thank you.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Haeretik I assumed my pro fee was going to further develop options and the experience for viewing/uploading those types of content.
And Heather has stated already that another team is working on other new features for us, besides the video thing.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
BTW. If one goes into advanced search you can choose to search for "Photos & Videos" Photos only or Videos Only. You can also add "Art/Illustration & CGI" and/or Screenshots.
Works for me.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Abiola_Lapite: as you note, with cgi and illustrations, Flickr have long been doing the very "curating" they say they don't want to do with video
Not true. There's no way for you to filter out cgi and illsutrations from your contacts page etc.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
*L
says:
(my english is not good, i hope you can understand what i'm trying to say)
i know this has been discussed before: videos and photos could be in different streams. to see them together you just had to put them in the same set.
not too complicated , or is it?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
www.flickr.com/help/video/
What is video on Flickr?
1. A long photo
I don't understand what means by "a long photo".
Photography is about the moment.
The art of photography lies at how the photographers capture that single moment yet expressing it all.
I don't think there is such thing as "a long photo".
I can't imagine how Flickr could come up with this idea.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
A long Photo:
www.flickr.com/photos/paypaul/2405983893/
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
@BrandonWhite:
I just hope it doesn't get flooded with crappy videos and ppl who leave disrespectful comments like youtube.
The only people I've noticed leaving disrespectful comments so far are few of the anti-video crowd.
Case in point.
I know they don't represent the majority of those who are opposed to video, but I've yet to see any other negative result of flickr allowing videos.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
What would be cool is if we had an audio slideshow feature instead of just video. That would be a better fit with flickr. of course you then easily open yourselves up to copyright probs as 5,000,000 people suddenly stick their kids photos up with robbie williams stuck over the top.
there is audio slideshow software out there e.g. soundslides.com/ but to incorporate it into flickr would give the social networking aspect.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
So video's here to stay! So's the was in Iraq! That doesn't make it a good thing.
The first time it interfere's with me in any way my three year association with Flickr is over at the end of the subscription period.
I suggest you chang your name to Flickeos!!!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I have found some tutorials on Photoshop while using the advanced search for tutorial videos. Unfortunately Flickr still has glitches. This is exactly the kind of example of great use of video but I can't even see it. Could this be a bug associated with my account setting of not permitting videos to start automatically?
Boo Hoo!
www.flickr.com/photos/ktp/2405081144/in/set-7215760446693...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Everything always gravitates to the lowest common denominator. So why not dumb down flickr aswell....resistance is futile......you will be assimilated...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
A long photo?
More Web 2.0 Newspeak.
Remember the Web 1.0 bullshit generator?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I can´t understand that, with so many issues to be solved (just check the FlickrIdeas group), Flickr was wasting time implementing this video thing, descaracterizing the site and transforming it in just another Hi5 or facebook. So disapointing...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's not quite anywhere near Facebook or Myspace. Neither of those sites have the kind groups or group discussions like this that flickr has.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I am glad there's video allowed on flickr now. I am also glad it has a limit of 90 seconds. Why?
because I don't just use flickr for photos. I use it as a social site, because it is a social site, and not just a photo hosting site.
I also primarily use flickr to share pictures of my kids with friends and family. I did not like having to upload videos elsewhere (such as youtube or blip.tv). I considered switching to a site that did do both pictures and video, but I liked flickr too much.
I don't think I'd be happy if the 90 second limit was removed, though. I might have a handful of longer than 90 second videos... However, I think 90 seconds keeps it to 'a moment.' because 90 seconds is a moment as well. ya, it'd be great if they'd put some effort into improving other features (or allowing us to backup our flickr account stuff), but this is still a pretty cool feature. Also, because you have to be pro to use it, it means more people might go pro.
not all of us on flickr are professional photographers. we're just here to have fun, and be social. allowing video helps that. The videos show as a little clip and they don't play automatically, so I don't even think it detracts from the overall view of the site.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
So video's here to stay! So's the was in Iraq!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
It's video, people. A moving picture. Get some perspective...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Photography is about the moment.
The art of photography lies at how the photographers capture that single moment yet expressing it all.
I agree, and I demand that Flickr immediately delete all photos taken with a shutter speed of longer than 1/500 of a second.
Personally I'm waiting for a camera with an embedded quantum computer that can capture the tiniest indivisible moments of time.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Well as a direct result of Yahoo's intransigence I have today signed my two premium e-mail accounts up with another supplier (I was having a similar who-cares-about- a-customer attitude from them too - regarding the amount of spam). I shall not, unless there is a U-turn regarding filters, be renewing my Flickr pro at the end of the year.
So from a happy little bunny paying $75 per year to Yahoo for years, I go to a Yahoo adverse critic, not prepared to shell out anything.
Really if Microshaft / AOL do take over, there is nothing now to be lost!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
the the more things change......the more they suck
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I demand that Flickr immediately delete all photos taken with a shutter speed of longer than 1/500 of a second
make a group and try to get 25,000 members then I agree with you
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
The Searcher
stagedoor: simple. My photostream is not yours. So if you want to not see what I want to show, your only option is to not come to my stream.
Well that's extremely misleading to say the least. At the moment I can filter out all photos of moderate and restricted content of a photostream, so the viewer presently does have a choice of what they want to see in streams. So you can't really claim that you already have complete control over what other people see in your photostream.
And that's a good thing. Flickr has (by and large) always tried to give the user choice: choice in how those who upload classify their material; choice in what sizes are available; choice about who can blog/download their photos; choice about licences used; and choice for what others want to view.
Not implementing an option whereby users can choose not to view video (or other content) in someone's photostream is, unfortunately, going against a long-held philosophy of Flickr and, in my opinion, is more damaging itself than allowing videos to be included in streams.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
F a b i o
make a group and try to get 25,000 members then I agree with you
It's misleading to suggest that the 25000 people in the "no to video in flickr" group are all against video. I'm in the group, and I've nothing against video (if it were implemented so that users could opt out of viewing them).
So are many others, who are there
1) because they were invited and
2) because they're interested in the debate.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Abiola: what are you talking about? There is no such function that would allow you or anyone to hide art/illustration from view within a photostream. None. Anywhere. Ever. Perhaps people should take a step back and gain an understanding of how Flickr actually works, before coming up with radical plans for how they would like it to change.
jim: that's been discussed several times already. The content filters are fundamentally different than backseat-curating photostreams. There are broader issues that trump personal preferences, when it comes to porn. As well, it's been long, long since the dawn of Flickr design element that porn should be a choice of the viewer, not the creator. Before the filters, porn had to be private, completely hidden unless people chose to view it via porn groups.
Now with filters, porn is allowed in public, but it simply cannot be forced upon a viewer without permission. That is something every creator agrees on when signing up to Flickr. If you post porn, it's viewer's choice.
So yes, as has been said many times already, when it comes to porn, it is viewer's choice. But for any public, "safe" content, what I put in my photostream, is there because I want it there. So if you don't want to see content based on any other criteria other than porn, for example the media type, then your only option is to just not come to my stream.
No one is forcing you to. No one WANTS you to, if you don't want to see what I want to show.
Flickr is quite simply a sharing site. The "sharing" part comes first.
[and as has also been said many many times already, anything outside of the photostream, in public areas, an argument could easily be made that it should be up to you, the viewer. Currently you can hide video from searches, but only manually. It seems to follow with Flickr's design that it should be included in the permanent Account Settings. But that has nothing at all to do with what you are allowed to see within a photostream.]
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
 Well put, and exactly my point.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Geeezzzeee....... you would need a train load of crackers to go with the whine in this bunch!
I have uploader 3.0.5 and it will not accept video content even though the tools page says it will. What gives?
Never mind........ I just found the link for 3.1
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
i just want to bring up Dbthayer's point again.
he wants to avoid seeing videos on the "photos from my contacts" page.
while i agree that the photostream itself is sacrosanct, and should not be "scrubbed", i think he has a point about scrubbing the contacts page.
as someone uploading video, if one of my contacts doesn't want to see my video work, i'd like it is they could scrub my work from the contact's page.
if this ends up being solved by greasemonkey, or if flickr adds "video" classes to the video thumbnail wrappers so that "stylish" can handle it, that'd be nice too.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
flickr is a community of people that like to share there views. Weather it be a still or motion, there is emotion that we all want out of it. It's something to look at from there perspective. Enjoy it or move on to the next one.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
striatic: while this would fall into the areas-other-than-photostream viewer control, don't you think that sets people up with false expectations?
If they choose to blind themselves to the only warning device they have telling them what's in someone's photostream, then aren't they going to be constantly revulsed and repulsed and convulsed when they keep going into streams full of vile video? Their only warning that their contacts have become smallminded, pitiful video purveyors, is their "photos from my contacts" page.
wouldn't it make more sense to keep video visible there, so they can have some way of systematically eradicating each and every contact that they have who dares use video?
Otherwise they're going to constantly curse and rue the day, each day they think they're going to look at a contact's cat-sitting-on-sill pics, and instead are met with cat-sitting-on-sill video.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
striatic"
thanks.
yes, the photostream is sacrosanct.
The Searcher:
nope. I could care less about what people do in their own photostreams. porn, video, pandas, art, whatever.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
'Their only warning that their contacts have become smallminded, pitiful video purveyors, is their "photos from my contacts" page.'
well, this assumes that people who don't want to watch video simply don't want to watch video.
but you know, maybe they'd be okay with small minded video purveyors, so long as they mostly see the photos from those people.
i guess it depends on how much video is actually on Dbthayer's contacts' photos section, per page.
if it is one video every three pages, then maybe this really isn't an issue.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
dbthayer: so it's ok with you if your "photos from your contacts" functionality is broken? Remember the bruhaha when it actually was broken? When it wasn't updated regularly so no one knew when anyone had uploaded anything new?
Isn't that how yours would behave then? You'd continue to see images that were uploaded days or weeks ago, seemingly nothing new from your contacts, because their recent work is video.
Or, you'd see new work, because your contacts are uploading a mix of new video and images. So you'd go hey that photo looks cool, I'm going to go check it out, and then you find yourself on a photostream surrounded in video.
I guess it's a preference thing and I don't have a problem with it, but it sure seems like you're asking to essentially disable the functionality of the feature. It would no longer give you an accurate or clear picture of what your contacts are doing.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
My suggestion to all those who are "not renewing my pro account" would be to have the courage of your convictions, and hit the delete button on the account right now at the same time on April 16 (see below).
I say this for entirely selfish reasons (I'm sick of hearing it), but it does have a significant benefit if you're actually serious, and not just caught up in the moment or a brief fit of drama:
First, most people who threaten this sort of thing never follow through. Posted here, it's just sound and fury, signifying nothing. Flickr knows it, so as a threat, it's on the level of "I'll hold my breath until you take video away."
Next, people will fail to renew pro accounts all the time, either because they forget, they don't feel like it, they don't use Flickr, any of a number of reasons. Noone at Flickr is going to check an un-renewed account, say "why did this person not renew?" and dig through months-old Help Forum threads to find out if they were one of the people who threatened to do so when video was launched. Any value as a message to Flickr is essentially null if you just let your account lapse. It'll just be lost in the noise of all the other accounts that lapsed for unrelated reasons.
But you know what would make an effective message? A 30+ pages-long thread peppered with the icons of deleted accounts. If the site is truly ruined for you (though how you could know that at this point is a little mystifying to me), then you've got nothing to lose.
Here's a suggestion: do it on April 16th, Flickr's free doughnut day; that'll give people time to back things up, as well as provide the symbolic gesture against fun and frivolity that you all seem to be craving.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
matt edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
|
Perhaps that camera can be found on the TARDIS!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock wrote So video's here to stay! So's the was in Iraq!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
It's video, people. A moving picture. Get some perspective...
Perspective?
Another bit of Wordplay!
I do love these threads!
Why would I leave Flickr?
I'd be missing all this.
Hee! hee! Hee! hee! hee!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
How come the issue isn't extremely vocal about scanned drawings, animated gifs, etc which have been around forever on Flickr? What's the difference between those and short vid segments?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I don't like doughnuts/donuts.
I'm not deleting my account. I just try to live with the current situation and voice out ideas that I think are not too much to ask for in terms of implementing them.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The Searcher:
try clicking the "Only Show Photos from Your Family & Friends" toggle. or toggle between "Show 1 Photo" and "Showing 5 Photos".
magic! the display changes.
is that broken?
on the other hand, a "Show Only Video" toggle could be quite useful for somebody who wants to find a video in many pages of mixed "items".
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
dbthayer Are you speaking of the tools available in Media Searches? If so that is available in the "advanced" search page.
That's how I found out people are already putting up some interesting and informative tutorials.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's broken if the display is lying to you. Which it would be, if you chose to hide specific content types that would otherwise be there. You're not changing how you view it, you're changing what it's reporting to you.
It's not like there aren't a thousand granular display choices you could request Flickr to give you. Only show images uploaded on Thursdays. Only show images without tags. Only show CC licensed images. Only show images with "cat" tags.
Except these options are mostly already available to you elsewhere. The "things from your contacts" view has a specific purpose, to show you what's new that they've uploaded. Flickr lets you choose the "they" depending on the contact level. But that's it.
It doesn't bother me a bit if you choose to display misleading data to yourself. But it is misleading, and I doubt Flickr is going to add functionality that breaks the intended functionality.
That sort of thing is right up greasemonkey's alley.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
PayPaul(Leader Of The WW Tribe):
no, I'm talking about the Contacts page.
www.flickr.com/photos/friends/
the toggles at the bottom..
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The Searcher:
sorry, don't get your point--yes, I can already change what it's reporting to me. if I click "Show 1 Photo", the display is preventing me from seeing new things. "lying", as you call it.
And I'm not asking for a thousand granular display choices. there are currently two sets of toggles, I'm suggesting a third.
actually, the two toggles that are there are pretty useless to me--for all I care they could remove those. ;-)
edit: actually the display already lies to me every time somebody uploads a batch of more than 5 "items".
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
dbthayer edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
Let me add my voice text to those who have asked that this term "long photos" be discarded. It's total nonsense. If it weren't, then flickr would not have needed to change "Your photos" to "Your photos and videos"--they would all still be photos (they just wouldn't all be "still photos" ha ha ha). It seems more likely that flickr staff (rightly) anticipated the kind of backlash we see here and wanted to dull its edge by claiming that, no, these new things are photos so there is nothing to worry/complain about. It just the same as the stupid "flickr loves you" nonsense.
Time to drop them both.
(Reminder: I am someone not interested in video on flickr who has no problem with video being added to flickr.)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
If you chose "1 photo" it still shows you what's honestly there. If you had a choice for "no video" or "no artwork" (since Flickr seems to be putting these things in similar filter control level) then the 1 image it reported to you could be completely wrong. Instead of the newest image or video, it would be showing you a potentially old, out of date image. And it wouldn't be representational of what you would see on that person's stream.
You're bundling in display choices (which type of contact to display, how many images of each to display) with content type choices.
Hiding content types, breaks the function of the page. my opinion.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
> Hiding content types, breaks the function of the page. my opinion.
Mine, too.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I don't see anything at all wrong with an "only show videos" or "only show photos" toggle on the contacts page, or on any flickr page for that matter. That actually sounds quite useful. It doesn't sound like it would be "breaking" the function of the page. It would be just like adding a search criterion, and giving the user more flexibility in specifying what they are interested in looking at. Sounds like a great idea to me!
I'm totally pro video, but I also think that people should have as much choice as possible available to them.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I've seen some artistic photography type video...which is nice. Can we add music to our flickr pages? I think that would create a nice feature for viewing our photographs as well.
dd
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The Searcher:
true, I'm suggesting adding a toggle for content type. that's obviously a new twist on the toggle purpose.
you're certainly entitled to your opinion, I'm just proposing a solution. flickr is refusing to address the idea anyway, so it's all academic.
"1 photo" it still shows you what's honestly there
still don't get this point. this toggle hides photos that are honestly there. and even if I have "Showing 5 photos" selected, the display hides photos over 5 from one person.
let's also look at the other toggle. if I choose "only show photos from your family and friends", it hides vast numbers of photos. in my case, I don't have a lot of contacts who are F/F, so I'm only seeing old uploads.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
That was exactly what I was trying to say when this started (seemingly years ago). A video clip thumbnail (that I will never click on) will mask the photo thumbnail that I would check on my contacts list. A toggle would mean I could see on my home page the content I wanted to.
Well said dbthayer
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I am so pleased flickr has added video. My project at art school is (loosely) inspired by the films of Derek Jarman - I've always loved the segments of his films that are stills-with-movement, and for my project I'm wanting to explore atmosphere and the links between film and photos. So I want to take atmospheric photos, "films" that are photos that link together, super 8 experiments, and taking "stills" from super 8 and film. All of these are photographic to me - and I can now put them all together in my 'stream, linking them and putting them together in sets. I was planning to try out You Tube, and really not wanting to, because I don't have the space for so many different accounts in my life. Flickr's video is perfect for me - and so serendipitous. Thankyou thankyou!
(I'll still be referring to my 'stream as my photostream..... and would rather it was just "photos from knautia" as that's what I predominantly do....)
(edited for atrocious spelling)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
knautia edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
|
dbthayer: the point is, whatever it does show you based on your viewing prefs is accurate. If you choose family/friends, it shows you the most recent images from family/friends. If you choose "1 image" it shows you the most recent single image from your contacts.
if you had a "hide video" option, all of your other viewing choices, would no longer be accurate. It would no longer truthfully be showing you the most recent image from the contacts you view. And considering that's the whole purpose and point of that page (and breaking it caused a huge major disruption in the function of Flickr for many members last month), having an option to break that function, is probably not something Flickr is going to do.
"I don't see anything at all wrong with an "only show videos" or "only show photos" toggle on the contacts page, or on any flickr page for that matter."
David: There's something terribly, terribly wrong with the second half of this statement. If you don't see anything wrong with that, then you don't understand how Flickr works.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I was intrigued with flickr's idea of a long photo. Today I experimented with that concept. I have in the past used my various video cameras and massaged the heck out of what was captured by adding titles, pans, zooms, transitions, music, narration and many of the other things that our digital world allows.
Today I went short and simple. I tried to limit myself to 30 seconds, with only a fade in and out. Minimal editing using only simple software... Microsoft Movie Maker.
The results were OK for a first time and I can see the potential of the long photo idea. I considered muting the sound to make it more photo like and let the moving images stand by themselves. I may ultimately do that.
So for me, the hosting of shortish videos by flickr has prompted a new way of using the video format. I'll continue to shoot photos and longer videos, but I like the long photo idea flickr has proposed and is hosting.
Bill
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
@the searcher:
being not opposed to videos on flickr, i have to say, that the first part of the statement is not so terribly wrong.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Hello, about copyright: in /embed: why not "Show the video's title and owner at the start" by default if someone else wants to embed the video in other website.
At the moment I can select to not include the author of any video on Flickr.
Please, it is possible just to delete that option and include the author on the video?
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The Searcher:
there's no relation between toggles and the recent update problems, so I'm not much concerned about the 'accuracy'' that you describe. if I choose to view only video thumbs, I'll just have to realize that I'm no longer seeing the most recent still photo uploads. or any still photos at all.
I know it's not something they're going to do, they consider it "presumptively curating". although I can hide everything from contacts who aren't F/F, and that's not "presumptively curating". lol.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
malanalars: I'm not saying it's necessarily "wrong", anymore than any additional toggle or feature or button could be necessarily wrong to add. I'm just saying, it seems to affect the exact function of the contacts page, in a negative way.
Take your "favorites" page, for example. There's no such options to view it any other way but the way it is. Would there be any point to having a "hide video" button on this page, considering that you are the one who made the video favorites to begin with? no.
So with your contacts, these are the contacts you chose. You chose to associate with them, and chose to have them appear on your contacts page. Like the friend with the occasional obnoxious habit, you can't have just the part of your friend that you like. You've invited him in, so you kind of have to put up with him now.
If you don't like your friends, warts and all, then you just shouldn't be friends with them. having a piece of cardboard that you can hold up to one eye to try to hide bits of them, doesn't really give you an honest picture of them.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I deleted my account( used ta be wolfwhispers) on principle over the german thingy, trust me, I went through some SERIOUS withdrawals.
If ya gotta do it make a list of pros and cons first, may save ya some grief later.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
 Agreed agreed. I want to be able to look at my home page and know that a contact has new photos, making it a good time to visit their stream and at that point choose to click or not click on any videos they have. Am I still seeing that they have videos? Yup.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Mac OS Flickr Uploadr 3.0.5 doesn't actually support uploading videos, yet the description on www.flickr.com/tools/ says it does:
Download the Flickr Uploadr to drag in photos or video from your computer, add titles, tags and other metadata and upload it all to Flickr.
This is very misleading.
----- edit
OK, I figured out that the Flickr tools page is out of date, the official thread for the new Uploadr has version 3.1 which supports videos.
Flickr, you should consider updating your site content to be more consistent.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
Alan M. edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
|
dbthayer: that's because its your contacts page. It makes sense to have some lenses that follow the variety of contacts you have. But it does not make sense to have lenses that hide the types of content your contacts have. In context of the function of that page. It isn't curating anything, it's the function of that page to show you what your peeps have.
To follow that functionality, there should be a choice to only view contacts that do not have any video. That would be logical in context of that page.
Honestly. Just wait till someone comes up with a script that does what you want. Then see how functional the page becomes for you as a result. Maybe you'll be happy. but I'll wager you also won't end up using your contacts page much, because it will always be giving you false data.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Actually Searcher, I think you misunderstand what used to make Flickr unique. If I wanted to be notified whenever someone takes a dump, I'd use Facebook. I don't. I want to be notified when they take a photo - I really don't care about what else they do.
A page which gave 'new photos from contacts' would not be lying or broken, it would be exactly what I signed up for.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
[This will be long, sorry.]
I should start by again acknowledging the bugs and clumsiness of some parts of the new video feature. We're grateful for your help in identifying them, and are working on fixing these problems, including cleaning up some of the language on the site (so that it doesn't reflect an assumption that every member and every group will have videos), making the video player not start loading the video if you've turned autoplay off, providing a search preference that remembers that you don't want to see videos in search results, and some other things. Those of you that have been here for a while know that we don't often get things right the first time :) Thanks for your patience.
Further, we aren't ignoring your protests, and we apologize if it seems that way. Heather and other staff members in the forums have tried to make it clear that we are hearing you; indeed, when tens of thousands of members join protest groups over a feature, we can't help but notice. But as Heather has also already said, video on Flickr is not going away. We still believe strongly that adding video to Flickr was the right thing to do, and we're still very excited about it and think it will improve the site for the majority of our users, especially as we move into the future and more and more people are taking videos with their video-capable phones and cameras.
But some protesters have argued that after such an outcry against video as we've seen, we should rethink our decision; some have suggested that we clearly don't know what our users want if we didn't anticipate such a response. But we did, actually; we knew it would not be popular with a very vocal number of members. So why then did we go ahead with it, you ask? I'll see if I can explain....
In Flickr's youth, when we were turning it from a real-time chat environment into an actual photosharing website, we envisioned it as a better place for people to share their collections of personal photography with friends and family. I remember Stewart talking about how his memories of sitting down on the couch with family during holidays going over the family photo albums, with different family members reminiscing about particular details of each photo. What if, we wondered, we had a website that captured those couch conversations and stored them for the benefit of a wider audience? That would be grand, we thought, and we proceeded to build Flickr as that website. Before there was a "photostream" on Flickr, there was a "shoebox", named after that box where you might keep your collection of Polaroids and snapshots to be pulled out occasionally and shared around. We wanted to give people a place to put that shoebox online.
For various reasons, a whole nother class of people also fortuitously joined the site and found it useful as away to share other kinds of photography -- documentary, artistic, esthetic minded photography. We of course had no problem with that, and were in fact pleasantly surprised with the number of incredible artists who uploaded so many great photographs to Flickr. (We now see millions of new photos uploaded every day, which makes my head asplode.) Stewart had the great idea to allow "tagging" of photos, which the social bookmarking site de.licio.us had proved so useful. Tags, and the default privacy setting of "public" for all uploaded photos, provided visitors and members of flickr.com with quick access to a huge library of photos dealing with nearly any topic you could think of a tag for. We've since added a powerful search engine that now indexes 2 billion+ photos, making Flickr a very rich photographic resource. And that's all thanks to all of you uploading and sharing your photos.
But both types of users described above still exist on Flickr.com. Some people, like Flickr's own community manager, Heather, straddle the line, sharing her life with friends and family and also surfing (and contributing to) the vast collection of incredible photography on the site. Some people start on Flickr sharing snapshots with friends, but find the pleasant feedback of favorites and comments on their photos intoxicating, and get inspired by all the great photographers on the site and drift towards the second class of Flickr members, those more interested in photography for photography's sake. We love that the site is so useful for so many different kinds of users, and we hope that is always the case.
But if there is a primary type of Flickr member, it is still (despite the large number of talented artists that grace us with their photography) the kind of member we first envisioned the site attracting: people sharing their personal photos with friends and family. And that sort of person increasingly also takes short videos with the same camera/phone they use to take their photos. We've actually wanted to add video to the site for years now to provide an outlet to share everything that comes out of your digital camera, but other improvements to the site always seemed to take priority. So it wasn't until now that we were able to finally do it. And we believe without a doubt that it is the right feature at the right time for most Flickr members.
Sadly, a lot of the crap video out there on the greater web has defined for too many people what video on the web can be. People who use Flickr primarily for enjoying great photography are understandably worried that video on Flickr means the addition of obnoxious amatuer personality broadcasts and tons of republishing of TV and movie clips. We're worried about that too, and that's why we've set a short time limit on vdeos, restricted uploads to Pro members, and disallowed uploading of anything not user-created (which has been a rule on Flickr for years, actually). We don't want the crap, we really don't; adding video isn't about trying to compete with Youtube, it's about trying to provide a useful service to a large portion of our members who are already sharing their photos and who we reckon will welcome an easy way to also share their short videos.
So why are the loudest voices on Flickr the voices of protest and not the voices of the members who like the feature? I think there are a lot of possible reasons for that: there's not much incentive to come into the forum to say "well done!" (thanks to those of you who did that though!); the people most likely to use the video feature are the ones least likely to join groups or know about the help forums; user protests are a time honored internet tradition, and etc. We're not discounting your opinions, but we are balancing them against the less public feedback we're getting from people who love the feature. And against the tens of thousand of videos we've already seen uploaded.
In any case videos will stay on Flickr, and people will continue to upload them. We know that most of these videos will not be of wide interest; but then that is also the case with the majority of photos uploaded to Flickr. And here is what I find most discouraging about the loud protest of video: I wish that the artistic minded Flickr members would use their energy to prove to the world that video on the web does not have to to suck (hat tip to Vimeo and other like sites, already trying to prove it). I really love Flickr, and I'm happy that with the new video feature we're providing new opportunities for people to express themselves with images. I only wish that rather than pessimistically decrying the death of Flickr, everyone would contribute optimistically. We've seen it happen before, when thousands of photographers joined our personal photosharing site and started sharing fantastic artistic photography. My hope is that the same will happen now, and the video feature, intended mainly for members sharing with friends and family, will be embraced by artists too, and we'll see an explosion of creativity and beautiful videos on Flickr.
It's already happening to some degree, and I hope we'll soon see a lot more videos like these:
 
(I really wanted to post these exemplary videos, but I'm a little afraid of protesters taking the opportunity to spam them with protest comments; please don't make me regret doing this :)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Well said, Eric - and thank you all (staff) for the hard work you guys have put into the site from the very beginning. Yay Flickr! :)
edit: And I just watched those videos, and wow!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
FlyButtafly edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
Shame.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Thanks, Eric. That should be required reading.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
(shuffles feet) *
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
..well why didn't cha post that statement in the first place *jeesh*
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Bravo, Eric. I agree 100% -- and I was ambivalent about video here. Now, I find flickr even a much richer experience than it already was. :-)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It certainly should be required reading; at least someone has finally, unequivocally said that Flickr is officially not intended for anyone who actually likes photography.
Of course, all that stuff about being a photo sharing site now appears to have just been misleading advertising, but hey, who cares about little things like that.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Thanks Eric. And thanks for posting the examples. It gives us all an opportunity to further explore what video can be for Flickr.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
all that stuff about being a photo sharing site now appears to have just been misleading advertising
Apart from the bit where eric says:
"the kind of member we first envisioned the site attracting: people sharing their personal photos "
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Of course, all that stuff about being a photo sharing site now appears to have just been misleading advertising, but hey, who cares about little things like that.
Oh for pete's sake. It still is a photo sharing site.
And an art sharing site.
And a screencap sharing site.
And a video sharing site.
Eric Thanks so much for all you just said.
And you know I want to know how you were able to embed those videos into this discussion. :)
I have my challenge group all ready to go, as soon as you allow videos in discussions threads for the rest of us.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I joined flickr 2005 and deleted my account last year july 2007 because I memorize already what my contacts photos postings from spring to winter, frankly speaking got me bored.
after one week I open new flickr account again because my contacts emailed and emailed from my former you tube account to be back, so I did, I love flickring tho!
But now with this video, seriously speaking I am very happy, and very thankful for this decision, I love to see pictures but not whole year, it is so nice if people post sometimes video, whole year photo posting feed me up....only making video needs more time....
see here i made 11 seconds video from my gold fish, i like it, some of my contacts like it too!
www.flickr.com/photos/sequensissy58/2403608224/
thanks! you done it right flickr team!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
~ Sunshinelady ~ edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
Just watched a couple of those videos. One was of some guy getting his hair and beard cut. Exemplary? You've got to be kidding me.
I could not play a video in it's entirety without it buffering and stalling.
IMO a perfect example of why we don't need video on Flickr.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
the people most likely to use the video feature are the ones least likely to join groups or know about the help forums;
Just about says it all...
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Eric said ..and disallowed uploading of anything not user-created (which has been a rule on Flickr for years, actually)."
Maybe you should have figured out a better way to control the posting of copyrighted material or the reposting of members content on non owner photo streams before adding more options for ripping off content.
Flickr is loaded with stolen photos and now it will be loaded with stolen photos and video!
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
One was of some guy getting his hair and beard cut.
::laughs::
Yea, that would be Lomokev, one of the most talented photographers on Flickr. :)
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
"One was of some guy getting his hair and beard cut.
::laughs::
Yea, that would be Lomokev, one of the most talented photographers on Flickr. :) "
Yeah, and an example of how photo skill don't necessarily mean video skills.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
BowenPhoto And that is what the Report Abuse link at the foot of every page is for.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
 He didn't shoot the video, however.
I find it highly amusing, at any rate. And the videos are just exemplary.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Thanks Eric, that makes perfect sense. There are some excellent videos there and I hope to make one that good after some years' practice.
< tongue in cheek > Any chance of Flickr creating a filter so I can stop getting invites to protest groups for things I don't want to protest against? < \ tongue in cheek >
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
In Flickr's youth, when we were turning it from a real-time chat environment into an actual photosharing website, we envisioned it as a better place for people to share their collections of personal photography with friends and family.
Just about says it all...
People pick up cameras. They take photos of their friends and family. They'd like to share them online. Flickr lets them do this.
Then the Great Photographic Artists come along and also want to share their work. Flickr lets them do this.
Then people, for some unknown reason, would like to share short videos with friends and family. Flickr lets them do this.
Terrible of Flickr to accommodate folks in such a manner.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
And that really works well.
I'm guessing this guy didn't take all these photos:
[edited to remove link to photostream; please don't point fingers in the forums, use the "report abuse" link instead]
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
Eric (staff) edited this topic 15 months ago.
|
|
|
Staff: If you could please update the OP with a link to Eric's last post, that might be useful for other members logging into this thread for a catch-up.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Hey, I'm just correcting the facts.
You don't like the video? Great.
I agree with Eric, it's a brilliant example of what can be done with video. You get to hate it, I get to love it. Funny how opinions work like that.
Posted 15 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
Feed – Subscribe to help discussion threads
Flickr Blog |
About Flickr |
Terms of Use |
Your Privacy |
Copyright/IP Policy | Report Abuse
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
|
Italiano
|
Português
Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
