|
|
Haven't seen hiccups for quite some time but it happened many times before.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
 Wow after 48 pages you're still here!
You're a trooper Shexxy!
I'll be posting my still video pretty soon. If the camera didn't constantly shiver in the stiff wind it was recording it would be totally still but it's as close as I could get. As soon as I can get the bugs...gugs...bubs...bugs bunny....bu...bugs ironed out.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
(Staff)heather says:
“I don’t want video on Flickr.”
We’re sorry, but video is here to stay. We’d love for everyone to give it a shot. If it’s not to your taste, then you should change the default on autoplay. You can distinguish between video and photos by the white arrow bottom left.
Feedback and iteration are very much part of our process. We very much value the feedback that we receive after features launch. It gives us a chance to take something good and give it that extra polish.
“I should be able to filter video out of my view of Flickr.”
There needs to be a balance between the “voice” of the creator and visitors. While it’s one thing to exclude certain content while searching, it’s quite another thing to presumptively curate what a member is choosing to share in their photostrem. (Snipped)
If everyone runs a mile to some other photo hosting and chat forum, would you still say video is here to stay? I for one is looking for a suitable alternative and i'll take my money with me. Google have something don't they?
If feedback is part of your business, why are you ONLY listening to only what you want to hear and ignoring the rest?
I don't want my account to show "and video" I have a flickr PHOTO account, not a PHOTO AND VIDEO account, I paid for a product, I don't want the salesman to come chasing me down the street and changing it after the agreed terms and conditions get changed without mutual agreement. This kind of practice in a shop would close the shop overnight. Don't do it, I'll have the service I paid for, and not some freaky hybrid service downgrade alternative forced upon me.
Your attitude stinks, it's generally very arrogant and I'd guess your quite senior because you beat everyone else to the ground with your attitude to get promoted, well I want your head on a silver plater next to the head of the person who thought up video.
Do not forget you did not created Flickr, you brought out a small company doing a good job, just the same as you brought out Egroups and other companies doing a good job, either rivalling you or just doing something you wanted to do, but taking the creative content and flushing the rest away. You have taken some good stuff and changed the direction it was going and yes the financial backing is good, but the force feeding some changes are damaging and do you no good.
Listen to your users, while you still have some.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@m1dlg:
Well, I looked around, and Google PicasaWeb is much more expensive than a Flickr Pro account. Besides, it is more limited. If you look at what Flickr offers, you still get a very good deal for a Pro account, in my opinion. There might be two interesting alternatives, 23hq and Ipernity, but I didn't really compare features yet. However, I don't think they offer the same kind of service (yet?) that Flickr offers.
About the attitude; I don't think that Flickr staff is any worse than the staff you would find at another place. I don't think it's realistic to ask that video goes away (after all, there seems to be a demand, and it probably generates money). I do think it's reasonable to ask Flickr staff to ensure that the photo part is not affected by the videos (I'm not convinced there yet). Personally I would also like a "no video" switch for individual accounts, and I hope that Flickr continues to improve the photo part.
About Flickr being arrogant ... well, they want to make money, and if video is a feature that many people seem to want here (don't ask me why), and that earns them money, then of course they are going to implement it. The people at Yahoo are not a charity of course.
About who created Flickr like it is today; of course that is largely the users. But that is no different from any other online community. I mean, look at YouTube, the users there make it successful. AND the users scape the community, which is one of the reasons why I hope Flickr won't change into a kind of FlouTube. I don't think it's fair towards Yahoo to tell them that the users made Flickr big; after all Yahoo created the means for the users to make it grow like this, and given the activity in this community, they did a very good job.
@Shhexycorin
"I'm pretty sure that the people who develop funky new site features generally aren't the guys who keep the machines running, they're, like, totally different jobs?!"
Probably, but they all come from a big pool called "employees". The people working on video cannot work on improving the photo part. So I don't think it's relevant whether those features are implemented by the same persons or by different groups.
And yes, I would prefer if the "thinkpower" of the Flickr employees would go into making the photo part even better, instead of in adding video to this site.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
absent summer edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
Jthole - The guy was talking about the site having hiccups, which would something for the operations guys to fix, not what features are or aren't developed by the developers. So I don't think what you said was relevant at all.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Your attitude stinks, it's generally very arrogant and I'd guess your quite senior because you beat everyone else to the ground with your attitude to get promoted, well I want your head on a silver plater next to the head of the person who thought up video.
Sorry. You're saying someone is arrogant and then demanding their head on a platter?
*stares at pot*
*stares at kettle*
*is at a loss*
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Probably different teams indeed, but that doesn't change anything (just read what I wrote please): effort going into video cannot go into photo. It's as simple as that. That relates to design, development, implementation, testing and operations.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I did read what you wrote, but you were responding to what I wrote and what I wrote was in response to someone complaining about the site being a little temperamental. Which has nothing to do with what you wrote.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Wow I had no idea the introduction of video could cause so much heated debate. I am really pleased I can upload short clips along with my photos anyway. Thanks Flickr!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
join www.23hq.com
no video, staff care about their users, site has potential, loving it so far :-)
p.s. it would be nice if Flickr would make happy the people that like video AND the ones that don't like by getting in touch here and come up with ideas and a solution for all this mess with ''moving photos'' and thousands of people frustrated for having paid $25 for a service that significantly changed.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I think their solution is to have video.
It's good that for people who can't handle their chocolate and peanut butter mingling, that there's other options. As far as "significantly changed", I have to say that in the last two weeks, I haven't viewed, either purposely or accidentally, a single video. Weird.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
F a b i o You do realize that 23hq may implement video, and are testing it out on their corporate site, right?
As for the 1000s of people in the No On Video group, only a handful of them are even active in that group anymore and they all seem to be spinning their wheels looking for some other hosting site (ipernity! oop, no wait, they have video... smugmug! oops, no wait, they have video... 23hq! oops, no wait, they might do video), naysaying any member there that now has second thoughts about video, or taking their names off the petitions.
Oh, meanwhile, we're up to about 84,725 videos uploaded and a few hundred video-specific groups.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
effort going into video cannot go into photo. It's as simple as that. That relates to design, development, implementation, testing and operations.
I have but three words (or two, depending on what you think of hyphens):
Mythical Man-Month.
Without knowing about the staffing levels and particular implementation details, it's a fallacy to think that taking people off of video would have any particular result. For all we know, they might have been working on video precisely because there was nothing else the could effectively do. That's probably not the case, since it's just a guess, but it's as good of a guess as anything else, and things are definitely not as as simple as "video stuff means less work on photo stuff".
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I resent being kept out of my groups because I chose to upload a video that has to do with their subject matter, but I am kept from doing so because it's "not a photo"
Damn, what a bunch of snobs many of you are.
Video is moving photography.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
We prefer opinionated photography mafia, thank you.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
alfuso,
that's a group issue, not a Flickr issue. There's probably another group on the same topic that will allow videos.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Neo that would be OPM for short.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Loving the video upload feature in flickr. Hating the 90 second limit on clips. It seems to reject viedo files longer than this. Can't it at least truncate? Or can the limit be more sensible? I have filmed "snapshots" for years and have almost none over 3 minutes in length. Half of them are over 90 seconds in length. You're selling yourself out to Facebook/youtube by imposing such a small time limit on clips.
Jason
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Do we need another YouTube? Video on Flickr stinks and I don't like it.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
Nuke812 edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
I don't wan't video on on Flickr! And I certanly wouldn't want to upload my photos to You Tube. I don't want to refer people to my photo website that is associated with videos like the girl being beat down by her "friends" etc. that so many people associate with You Tube.
Flickr might consider it appropriate to change the deal for people who pay for their service and then tell them to "get over it" but it is still a poor attitude towards it's customers. I, for one will vote with my wallet and not remew my Flickr membership it this situaton continue. I am willing pay more to post on a site for photographers if I have too.
Flickr Change this policy!!!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
keylargo: they won't. What logical reason would a company possibly have after spending so much time and effort and money on a feature? It would probably take a million people "voting with their wallet" to come close to the investment they already sunk into it. Unlikely.
jason: that time limit was sort of the point. They don't want to be youtube, so they don't want to have a longer time limit.
by the way: that video of the girl getting beaten? Never got ON youtube. It was shown on the news, but the girls were arrested (because they beat up a girl) before they could post anything. And honestly? Anyone who wants to post video proof of illegal/violent acts online? I say go right ahead. The sooner they'll get busted for it.
but they'll have to keep it to less than 90 seconds to post here. And have a credit card handy. So how many people do you think are going to post video proof of their crimes, when there's billing info linking it right to them?
Again, unlikely.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The Searcher
They might. Probably not, but I am willing to raise the cost of the "screw you coeffiecent" for flickr. Ignoring customer satisfactions and concerns is poor business, and I will let them know about it.
Whatever was posted to You Tube the point is that's what many people associate with You Tube. It's not what I want associated with a photo page I pay for and have spent considerable time uploading my photos to.
Right now it's 90 seconds and limited to "pro" accounts but there is no assurance that it will remain that way. Most likely it will devolve into a slicker version of You Tube.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
keylargo_diver edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
so, three weeks later has anyone noticed any major video related slowdown, nuisance videos in their groups and contacts uploads, too many videos in explore or whatever?
I really thought this whole video thing was a non-event. It shouldn't have been hyped so much, I think it should have been brought in quietly as a minor improvement to the site without changing all the language from photos to things and all that.
Most people aren't going to upload videos. The people that do are going to find that they are not getting many views because nobody has time to watch all that. Given that it is a new feature, you'd think everyone would be uploading videos just because of the novelty of it. I've had a digital video camera for a few years now and I hardly ever use it, the editing is too much work. I seriiously doubt that there is any danger of flickr turning into YouTube. I can see why the video opponents wouldn't want that, but can't they tolerate the occasional video?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Forget whether you want the medium of Video on a Photo sharing site (I don't), my main anger is that all this effort and space has been invested in video, before the really important missing features from photo sharing has been provided. 150 MB for a video? Why can't I upload my 30 MB tiffs? Why can't I upload RAW files? These are core to digital photography and instead of using my money to improve the core function of Flickr, the "Staff" have gone and included some foreign, mostly unwanted medium!
If you wanted to introduce video, you should have made it self funding by charging a premium for those who wanted it and provided me with my "missing" features as part of my Pro account.
Still as pissed off as day one!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
The only "thing" that really pisses me off isn't so much the "video" "thing" anymore. It's a non issue. If I post a video on flickr it will be when I can find a decent editor for both the audio and video. That's holding me up right now.
I only want to know when is flickr staff going to change the terminology "thingy". I am mighty sick of upchucking "things" to flickr.
I do prefer the term images and yes, that could apply to video as well.
If only flickr coders could come up with a way of being able to identify what's being uploaded. Perhaps the third party apps such as juploader which I use could have a check box so one could indicate the type of image being uploaded. Perhaps flickr itself would be able to identify and give a term to a work by using the filters in place being used to identify such works as say, a photo, an artwork, screenshot or video.
"Things have names!" as an old and quite intelligent employer told me once. I've never forgotten that lesson Tom Keohane taught me. The "things" and "items" nomenclature is simply "like" laziness.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I guess this is a non-issue now.
Promises made, promises forgotten=Broken promises.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@m1dlg:
I know of four people who have changed their status to pro specifically because of the addition of video. I know no people who have left as a result of it. Draw your own conclusions.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm uploading video in .mov from iMovie 08 - some work, some don't. What's the dillio? Very frustrating.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Draw conclusions on FOUR people? Big whoop.
I'm not suggesting leaving flickr. That shouldn't be what it takes to get staff to keep to what they say they're going to do.
Is the attitude of staff the old "my way or the highway" routine? Why is it that after 4 weeks they can't give an update on their promised efforts to change this terminology?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I know no people who have left as a result of it.
Here's one. Nice to meetcha.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's not about leaving, it's about non-renewal of Pro accounts, that'll be the thing. People will just not bother to want to be part of an organisation that thats them so shabbily!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
OH MY GOODNESS! Well, if we're going to all ditch video on Flickr, I say this:
1. Let's ditch the ability to post Descriptions of our photos too. It's a PHOTO SHARING SITE, not a place to write poetry or prose or use the written word. A photo tells a whole story by itself- why are we mucking that up by allowing us to express ourselves with clunky prose as well?
2. Let's set a limit on the types of cameras to use. No mobile phones. It's a photo sharing site, and you should have a a decent camera, to say the least. You're not serious if you're using your iPhone to take pictures.
3. Let's not allow altered photos of any kind. Chuck Photoshop out the window- this is a Photo Sharing site, not a place for digital art.
4. Let's forbid the use of digital photography too. True photographers know that film is still at the moment the superior medium. In fact, if you develop your film at Costco- you're out as well.
5. Can we please also get rid of all the pandering with MOO and HP and toys as well? This is a photo sharing site. I paid my Pro membership- lord knows I don't actually want to print anything.
6. In fact, let's squelch ANYTHING creative in any way and prevent progress of the creative mind. Video is awful. Video is easy. Video isn't art. Video is not expression.
This site has changed SO MUCH with the addition of video it's no longer a ... wait- oh please tell me SOMEONE is understanding my illustration of the absurd here? Or should I take a picture for you instead?
Your Flickr has not changed. But the world does evolve. Show of hands of people on this site that shoot and upload exclusively with film? What- is that crickets I hear? Wow. And all the purists said they'd never go digital (including me).
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Most people aren't going to upload videos. The people that do are going to find that they are not getting many views because nobody has time to watch all that.
I've found that videos seem to get more views than photos...
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I was anti video when the first rumors reared their head.
I have now posted 3 really bad videos, so can't exactly say no to the medium anymore.
What I have done however is complimented my love of photography and film by going out and buying a Super8 cine camera from way back when.
The introduction of video has given me an extension to my love of film, albeit indirectly.
I suppose I can't complain anymore..
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I need more time to make up my mind as to whether this is a succesful integration or not (I guess it will take time getting used to it), but as as an immediate feedback I strongly concur with one poster above : wasn't there a better term than "THINGS" ? I am not native English speaker but THINGS does look awkward. Items ? Elements ? Files ? "Photos and videos" ?....
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
all tortured logic, anecdotal evidence, and weak conclusions aside...
please flickr, let me toggle OFF/ON display of videos in My Contacts list. thanks!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Staff is going to leave the language unchanged. "Things" is more appealing to the YouTube crowd. We don't need no stinkin' hifalutin' hoity toidy language here.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@RubyMae:
*snort*
I almost lost my coffee (again). This is morphing into YouTubeR, isn't it?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
only in some folks' imagination.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm not incredibly opinionated on this...is anyone listening anyway?
At first I was very much against video on Flickr. But recently I have seen some videos that are pretty neat and it got me thinking that what bugs me the most is the sound issue. I haven't read this whole thread and don't know if anyone has brought it up, but I really think video on Flickr could work if sound wasn't allowed...
All the videos I really have admired so far don't have sound. They ARE just a series of photographs (try watching some and turning your sound off). I believe that video does have a lot of potential, but may seriously consider continuing my subscription come October if this debate is still taking over the community.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
clear oranges edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
I think its great, its the best place to put personal videos. I dont want to put my personal videos on youtube, i want them on my flickr account so my friends and family can view them along with my photos .. it is just another format afterall.
BUT, why only 90 seconds ... I created a 3 minute video (using the brilliant www.animoto.com) as a tribute to my mother who died last week and I want to share it with my family ... where do I put it, flickr of course but it caps it to 90 seconds ... oh well what a shame, nice feature but instantly broken for me!
Please extend it to greater than 90 seconds, you let me upload it all so playing what is already there shouldnt be too hard!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Language changes are coming... just slowly. We're sorry about that.
I believe there are around 3000 instances we have to look at, all of which need eye-balling, changing, checking for consistency, and then re-translating.
And all of which might need multiple instances to be written and coded in terms of "photo", "photos", "video, "videos", "photos and videos", "items", etc...
It's not as simple as you might think (or we might hope).
However, we're getting there... thanks for bearing with us.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
RubyMae, Neo - www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72220/
'Nuff said?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
flickr has sold out and shown that they only care about $$$$$. nuff said!
www.flickr.com/groups/no_video_on_flickr/
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
AWWWW!!!!! 90-seconds!?
I was happy to find out that I can now upload videos to Flickr and promptly uploaded a couple from my trip to Japan last year. They're sequential clips, the second a little longer than the first. Then I found out... 90-second limit. Well that kinda blows. It cut off on the second clip just as it was getting good!
Any possibility of a 2-minute limit instead?? While I understand that limits must be imposed so that people don't take advantage of this feature on Flickr, sometimes a minute and a half just isn't enough.
Other than that annoying limit, video is great!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
grope4mac You may not hear crickets but you can hear Parrots In Brooklyn
Heather commented on this one. An endorsement if I ever saw one.
I can work with the 90 second rule. It only fosters and requires a bit of creativity.
This whole video controversy inspired something else too. Someone in another group mentioned Karaoke on Flickr. Oh Noooo!
So I came with the 90 second version of Light My Fire
Hmmm. the possibilities are endless.
A challenge I can accept.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Probably someone's pointed this out already, but videos are beginning to show up among the "Interestingness" pages when you browse. It's nice that some of them are that popular. On the other hand, it's not so great that the interestingness pages apparently will have more and more black boxes rather than actually interesting photographs. Maybe you could exclude videos from the algorithm so that interestingness could remain interesting.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
When Flickr launched video, videos were included in the algorithm.
This was apparently a slight miscommunication among the Flickr staff, so they pulled videos out of the algorithm until a final decision could be made.
About two weeks ago, they announced that consensus had been reached at Flickr HQ, and from henceforth, video would be included in the algorithm and Explore.
I don't think they're going to revert. It would give the FLOPS staff too many headaches.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
They designed their video "thumbnail" to extract a frame from several seconds into the video, in hopes of avoiding that "black box" thumbnail, but it isn't perfect. I think we'll have to wait till they allow people to choose the descriptive frame of their videos themselves, before it goes away completely.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Ther﹣esa says: "so, three weeks later has anyone noticed any major video related slowdown, nuisance videos in their groups and contacts uploads, too many videos in explore or whatever?"
Yes, I still have the impression that response times are worse, and that there are more problems since video was added. I am sure Flickr will adjust in time (maturity of the code growing, and aligment of support staff) but for me, video didn't add anything positive to the site so far.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Any news on a replace video feature?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
After having uploaded a few dozens videos from my digicam I concur that the 90s limit is indeed not high enough to do proper justice to these captured small moments of life. I don't have any above 3 minutes but I do have a few above 90s and it is an annoyance not to be able to see them in full.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Why am I unable to see videos uploaded by my friends & contacts?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@grope4mac
I think your post is one of the most illustrative I have seen of the absurdity of the anti-video movement. Kudos!
Over a month after the introduction of video, there is still only one bad thing I have seen come about as a result: anti-video folks being jerks and posting vitriol as comments on videos.
www.flickr.com/photos/dgalvan/2404907161/
That's it. All this anti-video complaining boils down to intolerance. The flickr experience has not changed for the worse. They didn't take any features away from us. They just added a feature that we don't have to use if we don't want to. And some people are expecting refunds of their pro accounts for that? Yeesh.
(I do still think it does no harm to allow users to toggle on/off viewing videos, as dbthayer has suggested. I can toggle whether I want to view stuff from all my contacts or just friends and family in the contacs page. . . why not allow a similar toggle for just photos or just video as well?)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
why not allow a similar toggle for just photos or just video as well?
Because flickr has determined that if I choose to have video in my stream, you must be forced to see it (even if I can't force you to actually hit play). It apparently damages my artistic integrity if you don't see my video thumbnails.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I see Video is back on Explore. A while ago I was made to believe by Flickr Staff that this was a first day glitch.
Flickr absolutely needs to remove the restriction on Art being on Explore.
As I've said before, this is grossly unfair.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
As a side note on the subject of 90 second video I consider it a challenge rather than a hinderance. It actually allows me to produce Art as video. Of course the video in this case is from Photo Sources.
Reflections On Flickr Video
90 seconds can be done. I enjoy the restriction as it gives me the time to focus more sharply on a subject. Pun intended.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
ⓅⒶⓎⓅⒶⓊⓁ edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
grossly unfair
yeah. you'd think so, wouldn't you?
as I understand it, flickr's logic goes something like this:
1) imagery that flickr considers 'unauthentic' (i.e., Art) will be tolerated, but only with second-class status. in other words, no explore.
likewise, artists are incidental to flickr's master marketing plan, so their concerns are not of significant importance.
2) 'presumptive curating' (e.g., filtering video) is a dirty word in the flickrverse.
unless the curating is applied to Art, in which case it's cool. ;-)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'd hardly say that Flickr Staff would be qualified to "curate" art. Heck, I don't consider myself a curator or arbiter of what is Art. That is a question for the ages and the presumptive Sages.
There is Art in the "Art World" that incorporates the medium of photography as well. The lines drawn in the Art World are much more fuzzy and open ended.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
RubyMae: Flickr is all for you personally to show and/or hide whatever you want on your photostream. What they have held back on, is letting ME decide what should be visible on your photostream.
PayPaul: there was a response from Eric (staff) a while back there, outlining his/their philosophy for why video is still considered photographic and thus coronated with all-public-places status, and art is not. As dbthayer said, there really is no pressing business need for image "equality".
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's time there was Searcher.
There needs to be two Explore pages. Art should have its own.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I disagree. Mostly because I care not much at all for Explore already, so getting my own kid's table version isn't a solution. "Separate but equal" never really works out as intended.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
this video thing was pretty much the 'nail in the explore coffin' for me. haven't been to explore since video came out.
but I do look at my contacts' art. ;-)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It isn't so much about the Explosure that comes with Explore from flickr members but that which comes from people outside of flickr. This is supposed to represent what flickr is about to the Non-Flickr world. Flickr is about something more than just photos. It's composed of Art, Photos and Video.
Not to say that Explore contains all that's good in all our eyes, by no means but it contains overall representatives of a wide variety of styles and creative efforts. Explore or a series of medium specific Explore pages should be able to encompass all that IS Flickr.
I suggest a separate Art Explore as a correlation to the concept of multiple music or literary charts ie: Rock, Country or R&B charts.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
yeah, but apparently flickr doesn't want outsiders to know about the Art (the bastard stepchild).
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
i wanna check out the video on some jvc cams before buying one.
There is no jvc in the camera section
PLEASE:
since there isn't metadata in video (right?) ask right off the bat when people are uploading what the camcorder is if it can't detect meta , and then save as default .
it really stinks that video can't be searched by brand. you can fix this!!
Wally
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
since there isn't metadata in video
There can be metadata in video, only Flickr ignores it, just as they do with metadata in PNGs. :-(
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
the 'bits' language hasn't changed. how's that search/replace going ?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I say NO to videos on Flickr
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
wow, a 1000 signatures on that petition. quite a groundswell you got going there.
meanwhile, there appears to be almost 200,000 videos uploaded so far.
seems like a few more "yes" votes.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm having trouble uploading my vid to Flickr ...... is it me or is it a Flickr glitch?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
This is a sad day for flickr I canceled my pro. I will be looking for a nother venue for my work.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
This is the sad day? Today? Because video launched TWO MONTHS AGO.
If you only just noticed it today, maybe it didn't have such an impact on your life?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Feedback... well, I mentioned in a discussion topic in the help forum that I was having trouble with audio in flash movies - and I'm not alone, although the other people I've found with the problem haven't raised it here.
My feedback is that my comments went unanswered in that thread, whilst the staff replies covered a number of other issues.
It feels a lot like flickr is thinking "that's an Adobe problem" and leaving it at that. Do you in fact care?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
> If you only just noticed it today, maybe it didn't have such an impact on your life?
Well, reliability and speed really seem to have dropped since video was added. I still don't like that they added them, and I didn't see a reason yet to change my opinion.
But to be fair, I seriously looked at a few other picture sharing sites during the last weeks, but none is as good overall (taking all things into account) as Flickr.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Scanned a few pages of the topic and hasn't changed my view that video on Flickr shifts the focus of the site towards a part wannabe-photography site, part wannabe-YouTube. I don't want a site that is trying to keep one foot in each which is in danger of doing neither well.
Someone said that "it's not our site, it's Yahoo!'s", as though I should be a grateful guest and that the company is in some how distinct from its paying customers!
At the very start Heather said "I'm sorry but video is here to stay". Heather, I'm sorry but when my Pro membership runs out, I won't be. And I guess that's fine. Flickr cares less about my $25 and loves me a little bit less than I thought and hoped. Not the end of the world, just a bit of a shame and a missed opportunity to be special and distinctive in the web's rush to video.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's nothing like Youtube, not even close to there format, so that arguement dosen't fly. Flickr seems the same as it ever was, just more to it, that's all.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
paul: if your Flickr experience is shifting to where you don't want it, then leaving may be your only option. But I would ask you to make sure its your actual experience that's affected, and not your imagined nor feared-future experience.
There's a difference between video simply available, and video so assaulting your actual day to day function of the site that it doesn't serve you in the way that it did before.
I haven't actually seen a video in weeks, not even as a static icon. It's hard for me to be bothered by what I seem to be able to functionally ignore.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
nor feared-future experience
since we're paying for flickr a year (or more) in advance, I'd say concerns about the future experience are entirely reasonable.
not that flickr is likely to give any hints to us, their humble customers. guess it'll be up to investment lawyer guy to ferret out rumours at cocktail parties. speaking of which, ever wonder who tipped off techcrunch and others on the release date of video? since it wasn't flickr staff, my money is on one of the beta testers... ;-)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Half the time I upload videos it says it cannot be processed, but if I upload the same video a few times finally it processes, but then half the time it says its processing but never actually finishes, but if I keep uploading the same video eventually it works. Kind of annoying having to upload a video 5 times to get it to finally work before I can upload my next one (and go through it all again) to keep it in chronological order.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I uploaded one video today (about 15 seconds long) and it took at least an hour to 'process'. That was the longest I'd ever waited.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
speaking of which, ever wonder who tipped off techcrunch and others on the release date of video? since it wasn't flickr staff, my money is on one of the beta testers... ;-)
You mean techcrunch's announcement about video a couple of hours about launch? We did. There was a news embargo that was lifted and they posted immediately even though we hadn't launched. Launching stuff is big and complex and while we have a window, where we launch in that window is an unknown.
I'd like to applaud our beta testers. There was no leak. Pretty impressive in this day and age.
I uploaded one video today (about 15 seconds long) and it took at least an hour to 'process'. That was the longest I'd ever waited.
I had my first eternal "process" over the weekend. It never did actually make it. I'll circle round with Cal, but it's most likely that given the plethora of moving parts from here to them, there will be times when stuff doesn't work as it's supposed to.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
You mean techcrunch's announcement about video a couple of hours about launch? We did.
actually I was referring to the simultaneous March 16 release predictions from both techcrunch and cnet, both pretty accurate.
"Yahoo PR and other employees are still dead quiet on the subject (I asked every one of them at the party tonight), but the buzz is growing and the leaks haven’t been totally contained."
www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/16/video-coming-to-flickr-soon...
never mind, just curious about what goes on during cocktail party schmoozing. maybe techcrunch guy was trying to make the 'get' sound better than it was. ;-)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Oh, I think he was talking to Stewart. :)
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
It's a good feature, but it is annoying that yoiu have to pay for it! Could limited account holders not have 60 seconds of video per month in addition to their photo limit?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
What will happen when I have Pro account and If it expire - will the video last, will it be deleted (if I have it in latest 200) or something?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
"What will happen when I have Pro account and If it expire - will the video last, will it be deleted (if I have it in latest 200) or something?"
that's a good question that doesn't appear to be answered in the FAQ.
www.flickr.com/help/limits/#73
that information should be added to the FAQ, and this section of the TOS..
"Flickr pro provides subscribers with unlimited uploads (10 MB per photo), unlimited photo storage, unlimited bandwidth, unlimited sets, archiving of high resolution originals, the ability to post your photos in up to sixty (60) group pools, the ability to replace a photo and advertising-free browsing and sharing."
should also be revised.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Are there known issues with the video conversion service? Over the last week, I've uploaded a number of videos, and since they can't be longer than 90 secs., they've all been quite brief. I've noticed the conversion time takes upwards of an hour, whereas in weeks before, I watched it finish within just minutes.
As I write this, I'm waiting for another video to be converted, and it's a painful crawl and still at the "This video is being processed" screen. :\
Thanks in advance.
[UPDATE] Over 8 hours later and it appears the video's still in the queue. For reference, when it does show up, it's:
» www.flickr.com/photos/torley/2598839739/
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
▓▒░ TORLEY ░▒▓ edited this topic ages ago.
|
|
|
I decided to reupload the movie, and it processed much quicker this time:
» www.flickr.com/photos/torley/2602091986/
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I have had to reupload videos several times over the day since it says it can't process it. If I upload it again it may process it that time.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Yeah, I've had four fail using the web page uploader over the last week all of which have successfully uploaded on the 2nd or 3rd attempt. It's annoying as in each instance I've had just enough time to describe, tag and geotag before they failed. Still they are all up now.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Yep, we're trying to work out some problems with video processing failing randomly, then successful later.
@striatic- the TOS is being changed to reflect the correct limits, as it happens, it has to go through legal people before that happens. But it is in the pipeline.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
kevin, what about in the FAQ?
what happens to someone's videos if they become a free member after being a pro member.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
(The FAQ was updated already. :) The videos are treated like the most recent 200 photos, just that no more can be uploaded.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
so it's possible for a free account to have videos. good to know!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Has this issue been raised?
Is it just me or anyone think that Flickr could have done with a better video screen capture? Half of the videos on flickr with a black thumbnails, and you don't what it is until you click play. Every click does suck up some bandwidth but only to find another boring baby or dog videos.
I wish it will capture a few thumbnails and user can select which thumbnail to represent their videos, like YouTube.
Don't you think?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
We can hope.
But the Scratch-n-Sniff photo feature keeps delivering a sulfurous smell to my nostrils.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Yuck! The videos all went to black again. Is this a new or unknown problem that's popped up again? I can't see my video or those of my bosom buddies!
TECH SUPPORT!
Puhleeeze!
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Oh and then there is the Bonk!
Two weeks ago Kevin says above they are aware of some videos sporadically uploading. Do you have an update on this and the black videos issue Kevin?
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
To PayPaul(Leader Of The WW Tribe): Take a look at this topic:
flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/70131/page7/
That topic is where you can post troubleshooting of video on Flickr. Some people had problems like you, but have since had those problems fixed. I had problems where I couldn't view any videos, but now I can.
Posted ages ago.
( permalink
)
|
Feed – Subscribe to help discussion threads