Help / The Help Forum

This thread was closed automatically due to a lack of responses over the last month.

Hot Topics

[staff response] porn spam link in comments
Latest: 43 minutes ago
Hi SmugMug, my wish list for Flickr
Latest: 2 hours ago
[Official Thread] Flickr downtime on May 22 and site issues since then. [14 AUG UPDATE]
Latest: 14 hours ago
[investigating, staff reply] Stats, Statistics, Lost Views!
Latest: 2 days ago
[Official Thread] Flickr login freedom is here
Latest: 2 days ago
[Official Thread] Scheduled downtime on May 22, plus more updates on speed & stability
Latest: 3 weeks ago

 

Current Discussion

Flickr Compression is DREADFUL
Latest: 4 minutes ago
Has something happened to Organizr/Batch Edit?
Latest: 4 minutes ago
Charged double
Latest: 7 minutes ago
downloading data
Latest: 41 minutes ago
Flickr Can't Count
Latest: 70 minutes ago
Cannot rearrange order of photos on upload page
Latest: 82 minutes ago
I am not receiving Flickr emails.
Latest: 2 hours ago
Flickr App (iOs) Can't save a picture after editing
Latest: 2 hours ago
Adding tags, etc to multiple images
Latest: 2 hours ago
Still Can't Place My Photos on a Map
Latest: 3 hours ago
Restricted account
Latest: 5 hours ago
No Groups
Latest: 5 hours ago
More...

Search the Help Forum

Album view just changed

murphman61 says:

The header just became enormous! It is now like the cover of a book. I personally think it's too big but I can live with that. What I really hate is the truncated titles. Anything beyond a few characters (25 or so) now abruptly ends with the dreaded 3 dots and (at least for me) you can't even hover over the title to get the rest. Hate, hate, hate that!

The photos within the album are now much bigger, for the most part, some almost full page depending on how everything fits in each line. Kinda weird and not really to my taste.
Posted at 2:04PM, 20 May 2015 PDT ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

Ugh. Yeah, this is a problem. I've got older sets now where 500px-wide photos are being blown up LARGE to fit across the page. And that's not even the muted header photo. Looks like crap. Flickr should *never* be enlarging our photos like that.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

Oh my goodness, I am just seeing this - let's hope this is a bug!

.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

murphman61 says:

Lú_:

I was just wondering if they were enlarging older, smaller pixel photos to fit the page. I won't be happy with that either.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

When Mabel and I agree something's bad, you know it's gotta be bad :D
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Aririn says:

I can't stand the new look. And adding "detail" at the end of the album url doesn't work anymore. Now I can't jump pages anymore. This really sucks for an album that has tons of photos.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

murphman61 says:

Lú_:

I'm glad to be in such good company ;-)
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

guidowerner says:

The album pages allow to switch between two different views. If I choose the smaller view I don't see photos that are blown to the full width of the screen.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

guidowerner:

It's currently defaulting to the large, and not remembering my choice if I switch to the small.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

guidowerner says:

For me it seems that only the default view of the album pages has changed. But You can still switch to the smaller version. There is no "new" view for me.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

murphman61 says:

guidowerner:

Thanks! I didn't even notice the toggle before. I do wish I could toggle the default though.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

overthemoon says:

I would like it to default to the smaller version, but it refuses to do so.
In fact, quite a few things are no longer defaulting to the way I had them before, such as Current timeframe in Groups: recent discussions, which now defaults to "since your last login". That is a nuisance because I never log out.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

guidowerner says:

murphman61:

Maybe it's a bug that it doesn't remember the last chosen view as default. I am not sure if it remembered the view before today or if simply the smaller view was always the default.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

guidowerner:

if simply the smaller view was always the default.

The shrunken view was the default. When I went to looked, noticing OP's post, it was already blown up.

.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

deskp1990 says:

Arg! I wish I could pick the default view for my albums.

This huge view is not good or usefull for looking at an album. I think this BIG view that is currently default is bad for most albums, It kindof looks like its made for mobile users???
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Brenda Anderson says:

Lú_:

Flickr should *never* be enlarging our photos like that.

This!
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

SaffyH says:

This is awful! In some albums I have 1000 plus photos! It us unworkable for me. It is taking forever to load. It is totally unusable!

Why are flickr staff so hell bent on destroying flickr? Do they want it to have a long term future?
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

wildlifetog says:

It's actually quite depressing to see how bad flickr is becoming in such a short space of time. It's almost as if they want to lose serious photographers deliberately. If I post a low res image at 900 pixels wide, I expect it to be displayed at 900 pixels wide and not enlarged to twice that size in an Album so that it looks out of focus. Why would anybody think that was a good idea?
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Kanga-Lorraine says:

Me as well (Australia ) Hate the ugly HUGE albums and cannot tolerate looking at them, why is everything being made SO large, no wonder it is so slow with so many Panda's and Oop's the worst ever in 5 years. Hope it changes back.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

"It's currently defaulting to the large, and not remembering my choice if I switch to the small."

That's the "bug" part of this, and it seems like it just started in the last day or so. Last week for sure I know he albums were remembering the last view I chose, not just for my albums but anywhere I browsed on the site. Now even a page refresh resets my preference.

But a reminder even if they fix this, the "large" display has been an available option for weeks, with this new site design rollout. So anyone can choose to view our albums small or large now.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

The Searcher:

the "large" display has been an available option for weeks, with this new site design rollout.

The "large display" did not "blow up" the individual photos to cover the entire screen as it does since just tonight, it only blew up the header.

"weeks" ? The rollout of this design was last week, May 7 '15, so that is just ten days
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

MabelAmber® ***Pluto5339*** Queen of Streetshots: Yes it did. The page will display usually two photos wide, then occasionally one will fill the whole screen. It just depends on the size of the images and the size of your browser window. Been doing that since it was rolled out, whenever that was.

Also it's May 20. May 7 would be 13 days away, not ten. While my plural for "weeks" may be off by a day, it seems closer than your count.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

This is a view quite common for me, since I tend to have a wide variety of image proportions/shapes. The view will fill two images across, sometimes three, and sometimes one. Here's a shot with all three:


Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

The Searcher:

Been doing that since it was rolled out, whenever that was.

Not for me it hasn't.
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

MabelAmber® ***Pluto5339*** Queen of Streetshots: It's ok. Not everyone notices everything.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Brenda Anderson says:

The 'blow up' of photos has been happening for me since this was rolled out.

I get single images on one row that are upsized to fit the row, regardless of the size of the image. e.g, a 640x427 original blown up to fill a row that is 937px wide.

I'm not too concerned about the default not sticking. But upsizing a photo to the point of pixelation is a worrying problem for me.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

The Searcher:

Not everyone notices everything.

Yes, you are correct there, evidently you didn't notice the comments at the top of this thread where other people are having it for the first time.

You may also not have noticed that some people are opted in to new features of the new rollout later than others.
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Thomas Hawk says:

I really like it.

Some of the crops don't always work though. It would be nice if it only chose photos where the crop would be correct.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

MabelAmber® ***Pluto5339*** Queen of Streetshots: Also with the introduction of this bug, many people may only be seeing this larger image view for the first time. They could have had it set to the smaller thumbs all along, so they'd never have known this other view even existed. Even though it did.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Okinawa Soba (Rob) says:

I don't mind the larger photo sizes. That's fine with me. However, having the Album Title cut off at "normal" screen settings is frustrating. If I link to one of my Albums (which I do a lot) the person opening the Album cannot read the full name of the Album.

Yes, I know the full title is displayed on the Album Page showing all of the Album thumbnails. But that's no good when the main thing you link folks to is the Album itself.

I wish they'd fix it so the full Title Display was carried over from the way we see it on the Album thumbnail page.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

The Searcher:

Again: The enlarged view with HUGE photos spread all over the screen was NEVER displayed for me, till just now, although I had already tried out the enlarged view using the square icon for that and the only thing that got enlarged was the header itself, not the individual photos.

I sincerely hope this may help somewhat.
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

murphman61 says:

Okinawa Soba (Rob):

Amen
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

MabelAmber® ***Pluto5339*** Queen of Streetshots: Yes and that's fine, I'm just saying you are either incorrect, or the page wasn't displaying the proper large view just for you. If you tried it out right when they were rolling out the changes it could have still been buggy, or the page didn't refresh long enough. And then if you never looked at that large view again you missed when it finally began working for you.

Or let me put it another way: What would be the PURPOSE of an icon/button that looks like a large square, next to a button that looks like a bunch of smaller squares? Do you really think the INTENDED purpose was just to make the header image larger? How does that make any logical sense for the iconography of the buttons? And why would they waste an entire button on just changing the header image on the page?

This is the display and purpose of that display option as it has been since they rolled out the new design. Period. Sorry you missed it, welcome to the party.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

kmacgray says:

The Searcher is correct!
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

I could live (reluctantly) with the stretching if it would default to the small size option, not the large. At least then whoever goes out of the way to choose the large is choosing that.

Default to large while also stretching out photos - that I'm not happy with. For me, this applies only to stuff I uploaded years ago, but some of those I can't even replace with larger images without breaking some relatively important links to them.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

Lú_: Right now until staff says otherwise I'm gonna say that default is a bug. At least the not remembering our preference after, since I'm pretty sure it used to.

And something I brought up elsewhere, maybe they need a bit of code in there, if an album has any images in it below the size threshold that the "large" view uses, then the "large" view is disabled for those albums and only the smaller view is available.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

kmacgray says:

My gripes with the new album view:

1. The cover photo is way too huge. I don't care about the darkness thing, but God man, the size is frickin' enormous.

2. Titles are too large and the truncation stinks. If truncation needs to happen, go longer with it.

3. The description renders in your browser's default font, not Flickr's new sans serif font. Currently on my iPad in Mobile Safari, it's rendering in Times Roman. That can't be right.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Brenda Anderson says:

For example, I don't want this album to have a 'large' version available, given that all the photos are square, and the 'large' view will crop everything it makes full width, which just ruins the point of the photo.
www.flickr.com/photos/curiouskiwi/sets/58884
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Katrin Ray says:

I'm okay with the larger photos in albums, but what I really miss is comments on albums!!
I still can access them if adding "/comments" to album's address, but it would be nice if Flickr integrates comments into the new album design.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

The Searcher:

And something I brought up elsewhere, maybe they need a bit of code in there, if an album has any images in it below the size threshold that the "large" view uses, then the "large" view is disabled for those albums and only the smaller view is available.

I quite like that idea.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Lú_ says:

Brenda Anderson:

For example, I don't want this album to have a 'large' version available, given that all the photos are square, and the 'large' view will crop everything it makes full width, which just ruins the point of the photo.
www.flickr.com/photos/curiouskiwi/sets/58884

Yeah, that's not okay either.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

Brenda Anderson: Wow that makes no sense (the crops). If they can't just display the image full square (and why not, since you have to scroll to see it all anyway), why not just keep the whole thing 1x2?

It is a bit weird now, as the images displayed on the album page, even when two across, are often larger than the image displays on its own photo page in the same browser window. You click on a photo to see it "full sized" and it shrinks.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Brenda Anderson says:

The Searcher:

often larger than the image displays on its own photo page in the same browser window.

Yes, that's the upsizing I mentioned before.

I have another album that holds all of my various 'buddy icons' over the years. Most of them are about 250x250 (if that big). Yet the album page shows some of them practically full screen. It's one thing to upsize from 1024 to 1100 or so ... but another to upsize from 250 to 1000.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

Brenda Anderson: Well Flickr isn't the place to host web graphics, you know.

*runs away and hides
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Brenda Anderson says:

The Searcher:

Ha! If they were ever posted anywhere other than Flickr, I might agree with you.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Dylan's World says:

The 'infinite scrolling' with this updated view means it takes ages to get to a shot from later in the album. Having to load every. single. image. is a huge waste of time and bandwidth.

What exactly was wrong with having 'Pages' in Albums?

This 'Update' continues to disappoint and annoy in all kinds of new ways. Bravo Yahoo!

I avoid all your services - I think of them as 'internet for dummies' but unfortunately you bought one I already used and are now working hard to bring it into line with the rest of the canon.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

martian cat says:

I just noticed the "big header photo at the top" of the open set. I am not excited about seeing this big banner photo. The thing that I wish that they would include is the full description to appear. I am so amazed that the description is the title and just 1 line of text.

As mentioned above, there is no way to comment on a set. Members and friends could make a comment on someone's set of photos when I joined Flickr. I cannot understand why this feature stopped.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Tatters ✾ says:

It is not a bug, unfortunately, that is how it is designed - looks like raw, "in a hurry" design.

The list - what have to be redesigned, changed, bring back to normal:

1. Paginate - must!
2. Bring back comment option . I can remind how it looks like (it is still available, but the link is removed from album view) : www.flickr.com/photos/tgerus/sets/72157623597106552/comments
3. Bring back MAP view option of the album. www.flickr.com/photos/tgerus/sets/72157623597106552/map/ The same as point 2- link is gone.
4. Make thumbnail view by default ( with pages navigation)- not these blown up images bigger than an original size.
5. "Front page" cover is ridiculous,- it is too dark and too big, but we cannot even read the full name of the album in many cases! . Redesign it! You give option to edit the cover, but what is the point? - you hardly can see the cover image (too dark).
6. When I click on "show more" - I want to see it how people see it, (you give somewhat text editing option only...)
7. Bring back Album count on the Albums page (how many albums)

Most of these point already mentioned above, agree with you, and I hope flickr stuff hear us, and it should not be difficult to fix.

Oh, one more - I remember in very old flickr (before 2011?...) flickr used to give info of date photo taken from...to in album - it was at the bottom of comments page, do you remember it? Such a useful info gone! why? Is would be great it you bring it back on the cover page.
Should I mention I still prefer SET, not Album...

EDITED: added point 7.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )
Tatters ✾ edited this topic 52 months ago.

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

The Searcher:

Interesting little lecture, but makes no sense. Congrats.

EDITED to remove the rest - equally redundant as what it addressed. . .
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )
MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito edited this topic 52 months ago.

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

Tatters ❀:

Agree with all your points.

In your list I miss the missing Album count. As it is now you need to go about counting your Albums from the Albums pages and figure out the exact number of Albums yourself.
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

frank_wilder says:

temp fix...put an image in the first position of the album that says something like:

"Flickr has “broken” the album view – they are now defaulting to the Large View.

You can fix it. Click on the Small View button. It looks like a section of a brick wall, and it is located in the upper right-hand corner (the icon is circled in red, in the above image.) "



www.flickr.com/photos/exetermusicassociation/17927117382/...
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Stewie1980 says:

frank_wilder:

You can fix it. Click on the Small View button.

The problem is that it not stays that way when you visit another album.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

pongo 2007 says:

Lú_:

Ugh. Yeah, this is a problem. I've got older sets now where 500px-wide photos are being blown up LARGE to fit across the page. And that's not even the muted header photo. Looks like crap. Flickr should *never* be enlarging our photos like that.

Totally agree with you, I just noticed the same thing on my albums too..
All those blown up pixilated images are horrible!
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

ZedOmega says:

Another update from Flickr, making the site look worse. They're on a freaking roll lately!
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

CatMacBride says:

Yes I can't say I like the extra large view of albums, particularly the cover image, it's far too big and it's difficult to find an image that works as the album cover and as a header. Also very annoying having to click smaller view each time I enter a new album can we decide on a default? And yes as mentioned above it would be nice to be able to get more info on the set if it's available instead of it being cut short and having to click for more.

edited to add I also dislike the cropping of images that takes place in the larger view...it just doesn't work.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )
CatMacBride edited this topic 52 months ago.

view photos

Lú_ says:

Just nudging this up so staff might notice? There really does seem to be an issue with default settings here, which must be a bug. (Plus the cropping, giant stretching etc. in that suddenly default large view.)
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

Lú_:

(Plus the cropping, giant stretching etc. in that suddenly default large view.)

Thanks for confirming my own findings here.

.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Emma Marie's Photos says:

Add me to the voices having issue with this change.

I have images that are 500x375 showing as 1525x1140 and look terrible.

It's not remembering my settings to show the smaller images.

There are no page numbers any more - a huge issue when some of my albums have 2000 images.

Not to mention both the showing big as the default (which non-users won't know how to change) but the constant scrolling uses up so much memory the album is useless past the first 100 of so images, because it slows everything down too much past that. There really, really needs to be pagination on these pages.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

And let us not forget: the missing Album count on the Albums page - as it is now we have to count all our Albums, like in the pre-computer era - imagine having hundreds, you need to make a note of it - I always thought computers were made to actually do the counting for you -

(I know, this is in fact OT for the thread.)
.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Tatters ✾ says:

MabelAmber® :

the missing Album count

Done - point 7 added. Of course it should be, and it is not 'OT for the thread'
Thanks
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

bad_juju2 says:

Tatters ❀:

Thank you for listing the needed changes.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

car and van says:

Aririn:

I always liked to look at and alter my albums by adding detail and having 18 pictures per page all the same size,This new lay out is awful
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Abbott's Patch Collection says:

guidowerner:

Thanks for that hint! I hate that some photos are enlarged -- that toggle does help -- though I wish it was a default we could select.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Stewie1980 says:

Emma Marie's Photos:

Not to mention both the showing big as the default (which non-users won't know how to change) but the constant scrolling uses up so much memory the album is useless past the first 100 of so images, because it slows everything down too much past that.

Non-users will be scarred away by all these new changes. Maybe they think we made a mess of the page and maybe we look stupid because they think we added those useless auto-tags.
Everytime there is a change on Flickr my friends (who are not members, only visitors) are complaining too.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

SF-Mike-57 says:

Stewie1980:

"Non-users will be scarred away by all these new changes. "


"scarred" is right, lol
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Frank Ernens says:

Whatever happened to responsive design?

- on my Retina iPad, the cover image takes up most of the screen but most of the title is cut off

- on the non-wide monitor I use for general computing, I can choose between most of the title being cut off or most of the description.

- on the wide, non-Retina monitor I use for photo processing, the title and description are usually visible if the browser window is made to fill most of the screen, but then the lines of the description are too long to comfortably read. But if I size the browser window more normally, to a roughly 4:3 aspect ratio, the cover photo occupies almost the entire window (with the text remaining largely visible).

I don't have a Retina desktop Mac to test, but I'd expect trouble there too. As with the iPad, the OS knows the screen has high pixel density and doubles the size of the text.

If I had to make a guess as to how this got out the door, it would be that it was only tested on Windows with a wide-screen, non-hiDPI monitor with the browser window maximized. A lot of Apple users just don't work that way - at the moment I have one of my albums in one browser window, this thread in another, and a Textedit window for editing the reply.

I'd also echo others' complaints about the tiling mode not being sticky and the uprezzing of images.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

Frank Ernens: "Responsive Design" is no longer a path Flickr/Yahoo apparently intend to follow. According to interviews and other media it was decided that the web site is designed for computers, and the app is used for mobile devices. Most mobile device browsers are no longer supported by the site.

As far as the description/title, that's resolution independent. For most views and orientations, the title and description are cut off on the right side. That is for some reason a design choice and looks that way across all computers and browsers, regardless of resolution or screen proportions. No explanation has yet been given for cutting off album titles instead of say, a carriage return.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Frank Ernens says:

The Searcher:

It would be completelty unreasonable for me to expect someone to install a Flickr app on their iPad just to view my photos. Yet, in most households, it's by far the screen with the most accurate colours and best black point.

As for resolution independence, if a font is a fixed number of pixels high in the CSS iOS will double that on a modern iPad.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

decembre says:

That's this DAMN justified everywhere effect - Not only on Flickr :
Sometime i find that useful , i use it a lot for quick search on goggle by example.

But on Flickr , the implementation is so "blinky", too huge, with huge load, less infos etc.
:-(

Why they think that's smart , marvellous, etc ....????

For me, I don't like it :
Small can be so beautiful .....
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

ian salvin says:

I deleted all my albums because of this. Flickr should provide OPTIONS for the user rather than dictating how images are viewed. It's yet another effort to placate cell phone users. Guess what Flickr? Photographers don't edit their images on cell phones. Size huge works for cell phones as image quality is secondary. I would have loved to keep my albums as it sorted images by interest; however I was totally put off by having no control over how they were viewed. Besides; with my photostream sometimes the comments are half the fun; and you can't see them in the present album format. Bad Panda!
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

ColleenM says:

i.snaps:

t's yet another effort to placate cell phone users.

Cell phone users get their own, specially designed pages.

The pages you see from a desktop/laptop are explicitly designed for desktop users.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

wildlifetog says:

ColleenM:

If that is the case then whoever explicitly designed the new album view default clearly knows nothing about photography or displaying photographs on the internet, or failing that, is hell bent on sabotaging our work.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Thomas Hawk says:

actually if you think about it, in a way, if someone is really so interested in your work that they'd drill down and go through an album, this is sort of forcing them to look at a lot of your photos the way they are meant to be looked at, large and full sized.

A lot of people are lazy when they flip through an album and won't bother to actually click on an individual photo to look at it large sized. This way Flickr is sort of forcing that on these people a little bit. Helping those folks along down the right path.

I like the whole idea of it. I just don't think they should pick photos that don't crop well for large view, or that are below a certain size, etc. -- but for full high res DSLR originals, I think they look GREAT!

The new view looks *especially* nice on a 23 inch 5k iMac full screen.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Frank Ernens says:

Thomas Hawk:

Mine are meant to be looked at with a lot of white space around them.

Looking at your neon album in the default big blocks mode, I see the first two photos (IMAX) side by side (because I don't have the browser maximised). As a result, the converging perspective of the marquee on the right hand picture leads the eye into the middle of the left hand one, ruining it. That left hand one is IMO the stronger of the two, but because it's cropped square, it's presented smaller than the other one.

OK, now I've resized the browser to almost the full screen and I'm distracted by the two ladies on the 2nd row and don't notice the top row at all.

Pictures should not be jammed up against each other like that. It was tolerable as thumbnails; it's just wrong as a "final" display.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Thomas Hawk says:

Frank Ernens:

I know what you mean about the problem with those two IMAX photos being the first two side by side.

I can't really help that problem though because I let Flickr present all of my albums ranked by their interestingness algorithm. Personally I don't think those are my two most interesting neon photos, but there's that wonky interestingness algorithm going cranky yanky again. So Flickr is deciding that this is how that album should be displayed not me.

I could manually change it of course, but when I'm refreshing almost 2,000 albums 2x a day, that would be a daunting task to have to manually have to do anything with them at all.

It would be nice if Flickr could score a higher interestingness number to whichever version of a photo you published was the strongest and and maybe even penalize a similar photo of the same subject from the same day/shoot a bit that would sort of force it down the page a bit when ranked by interestingness.

Maybe someday we'll get to that point of customization.
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Thomas Hawk says:

Frank Ernens:

Oh and I know what you mean about those two ladies. ;)
Posted 52 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Premik Russell Tubbs says:

murphman61:

Most of an album was truncated - no page 2. This is not good.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Janie Ho NYC Photographer says:

murphman61:

OK I just tweeted to FlickrHelp about this. the DEFAULT giant view makes me rethink using Flickr as a photography business portfolio. : (

-- See June 5 - twitter.com/janieho16/with_replies

What a pain it would be change!
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

Janie Ho NYC Photographer: The large view is no longer a default, they fixed that earlier last week. You can now choose which view you prefer, and the page/site will remember that choice and display other albums that way from then on.

That said, I would never use a social photo sharing site as a business portfolio. Flickr isn't intended for commercial purposes, largely because it isn't built to support those needs. You have no control over the display of your images or how the site is laid out, something that is crucial for a business/portfolio. You should have your own website for your business, where you have absolute control over every aspect of the presentation.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

nocklebeast says:

Have comments on albums been eliminated?

There used to be a way to navigate from an album to the collections that contained that album by viewing the comments on the album.

But now that the comment feature on an album appears to have been eliminated, there is no way to navigate to the collections an album appears in.

Is there a way to fix that?


Frankly, I find the direction flickr is going in a bit baffling. I get a terabyte of free storage, a nifty upload program that will search my entire computer of photos and upload them all.... but the very things that would help me organize and navigate through all the photos are being slowly eliminated.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )
nocklebeast edited this topic 51 months ago.

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

nocklebeast:


Have comments on albums been eliminated?


The direct link to that page has indeed been removed. You can still call it up by a url hack: add / comments to the Album URL, like so:

www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/sets/72157651485843623/...

The links to "thumbnails" and to "details" no longer work, they take you to the present Album page.

Advice: if you have any comments on Albums which are of value to you, copy them and preserve them in the Album description or below a comment before the URL hack no longer works and the comments are lost.
.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

nocklebeast says:

It's also unfortunate that I can't easily read the album description without logging out to read it.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

msol607 says:

Alas, Yahoo doesn't listen to users and/or have the staff and competence to fix obvious bugs, like the bizarrely-sized photos in the web album display. Same thing with Yahoo mail. Users endured months of broken redesigns and failures, forcing many (including me) to alll but abandon it. The new display in flickr is a mess. (The mobile version is ok.) Marissa needs to stop listening to clue-less geeks and start listening to users!
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

cocoesperanza says:

Trying to place new cover photo in position for Album

Flickr is not giving me full choice of photos in album to do this.
The screen which comes up for choosing just is not incorporating all the images.....

Seems there are only some of the photos showing from which to choose :(

Album selection seems squashed with right edge missing and photos missing too.... looks as though the block needs stretching out horizontally

?
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

cocoesperanza:

Try clearing your cache --- and or use a different browser for trouble shooting purposes.

Also: pending a fix you can still use Organizer to change the cover -
.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Westmoreland Greasy says:

The default large view when looking at my album from a public view (when logged out of my account), is sheer crap and complete stupidity. The view is too large and the resolution and focus stink.

Why they would think this is a good idea perplexes me completely. It seems there is always someone, who when they inherit a piece of software, feel that they need to monkey with something that was working just fine. Yahoo seems to be rife with this. Maybe they should hire some adults.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

martian cat says:

Now that the older version of my albums is not viewable, I lost all of the friendly comments on them for the past 10 years.

And, friends lost the comments I added to their albums, too.

This is a sad thought because there is no way to go back to see these to even take a screen capture. I have tried and my old album comments page does not appear.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

The Searcher says:

martian cat: Perhaps if you scroll up seven or eight comments you will find something that can help you.
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Tatters ✾ says:

For the month Flickr still have not brought the comments and map option back ?!?!
Cannot believe it... is it really so difficult? - just add the link on the album cover..., at least it should be some excuse/explanation somewhere...
What are you thinking, dear flickr support team?!
Posted 51 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

zehawk says:

Westmoreland Greasy:

Well said, I'm in the same boat and for the life of me I cant imagine any photographer wanting his/her photos upscaled while displaying. This is just stupid implementation by the devs.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:

Tatters ❀:

is it really so difficult?

I don't think the degree of "difficulty" for the engineers / programmers /coders is the reason for not restoring comments and map.

The probable reason is that they did not measure sufficient clicks on those features to justify keeping them. Remember: Flickr, just like television and radio stations, cater to the *majority*.
.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

kmacgray says:

Remember: Flickr, just like television and radio stations, cater to the *majority*

Which is logical if they are to remain in business.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito says:


Which is logical if they are to remain in business


In case this response is meant to address any type of presumed negative judgment in my earlier post: that comment is of a neutral and observational nature.
.
Posted 50 months ago. ( permalink )

This thread was closed automatically due to a lack of responses over the last month.

Subscribe to a feed of stuff on this page... Feed – Subscribe to help discussion threads