why do photosharing website offer only limited free space?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by sobriquet, Sep 19, 2008.

  1. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    On most videosharing websites (like youtube or veoh), it seems that
    you have unlimited space (except for some limitations on the size of
    individual video's afaik) to share video's.
    Why do typical photosharing sites like flickr and picasaweb offer only
    limited space for a free account?

    I've reached the upload limit of 200 pics on flickr now and although I
    liked flickr, I've decided to switch to picasaweb, which offers
    similar features (except I miss the statistics and the possibility to
    use search filters to limit the results to CC material) but more space
    (1 gb).

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/thcganja

    Some recent photos of fungi like mushrooms:
    http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/view?uname=THCganja&tags=nature#slideshow
    sobriquet, Sep 19, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. sobriquet

    railfan Guest

    On Sep 18, 8:22 pm, sobriquet <> wrote:
    > On most videosharing websites (like youtube or veoh), it seems that
    > you have unlimited space (except for some limitations on the size of
    > individual video's afaik) to share video's.
    > Why do typical photosharing sites like flickr and picasaweb offer only
    > limited space for a free account?


    Simple - because they want you to PAY for their service! When Yahoo
    Photos was changed to Flickr, all my albums were transferred over to
    the new service by them. I was pleased, as it worked seamlessly.
    Whenever I'd load more photos to Flickr, I'd get a message saying
    there was no monthly upload limits! Great, until one year had passed,
    and I got a message from Flickr stating that my one year free Flickr
    "Pro" account was now over, and I'd have to pay to keep my photos with
    them, or live with only 200 free ones. Fuggem! I deleted ALL of my
    albums, and only use them for transient photos that I want to share,
    keeping the number below 200 of course.

    Over the years I've had photos on many, many "free" sites, only to see
    them find out there was no money in it, and offering "upgrades" for
    monthly fees, or you can have photos on their sites if you buy prints,
    or they just folded. So I now don't believe anything any of them say,
    I just have photo albums on several different sites rather than trying
    to use one.

    It's all about the money!
    railfan, Sep 19, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. sobriquet

    tony cooper Guest

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:38:10 -0700 (PDT), railfan <>
    wrote:

    >Over the years I've had photos on many, many "free" sites, only to see
    >them find out there was no money in it, and offering "upgrades" for
    >monthly fees, or you can have photos on their sites if you buy prints,
    >or they just folded. So I now don't believe anything any of them say,
    >I just have photo albums on several different sites rather than trying
    >to use one.
    >
    >It's all about the money!


    How are you different? You are changing sites to avoid paying money.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Sep 19, 2008
    #3
  4. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    On 19 sep, 15:38, railfan <> wrote:
    > On Sep 18, 8:22 pm, sobriquet <> wrote:
    >
    > > On most videosharing websites (like youtube or veoh), it seems that
    > > you have unlimited space (except for some limitations on the size of
    > > individual video's afaik) to share video's.
    > > Why do typical photosharing sites like flickr and picasaweb offer only
    > > limited space for a free account?

    >
    > Simple - because they want you to PAY for their service!   When Yahoo
    > Photos was changed to Flickr, all my albums were transferred over to
    > the new service by them.  I was pleased, as it worked seamlessly.
    > Whenever I'd load more photos to Flickr, I'd get a message saying
    > there was no monthly upload limits!  Great, until one year had passed,
    > and I got a message from Flickr stating that my one year free Flickr
    > "Pro" account was now over, and I'd have to pay to keep my photos with
    > them, or live with only 200 free ones.  Fuggem!  I deleted ALL of my
    > albums, and only use them for transient photos that I want to share,
    > keeping the number below 200 of course.
    >
    > Over the years I've had photos on many, many "free" sites, only to see
    > them find out there was no money in it, and offering "upgrades" for
    > monthly fees, or you can have photos on their sites if you buy prints,
    > or they just folded.  So I now don't believe anything any of them say,
    > I just have photo albums on several different sites rather than trying
    > to use one.
    >
    > It's all about the money!


    Ok, but why are videosharing websites offering virtually unlimited
    space then? Are they not
    in it for the money?
    sobriquet, Sep 19, 2008
    #4
  5. sobriquet

    Guest

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:08:49 -0700 (PDT), in rec.photo.digital sobriquet
    <> wrote:

    >On 19 sep, 15:38, railfan <> wrote:


    >> It's all about the money!

    >
    >Ok, but why are videosharing websites offering virtually unlimited
    >space then? Are they not
    >in it for the money?


    How many other sites link to video on YT vs Flickr? Does your local
    newspaper's site link to YT or Flickr? Hosting sites are cheap quit your
    complaining. less than one cup of java at Starbucks/month.
    , Sep 19, 2008
    #5
  6. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    On 19 sep, 21:36, wrote:
    > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:08:49 -0700 (PDT), in rec.photo.digital sobriquet
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >On 19 sep, 15:38, railfan <> wrote:
    > >> It's all about the money!

    >
    > >Ok, but why are videosharing websites offering virtually unlimited
    > >space then? Are they not
    > >in it for the money?

    >
    > How many other sites link to video on YT vs Flickr?  Does your local
    > newspaper's site link to YT or Flickr? Hosting sites are cheap quit your
    > complaining. less than one cup of java at Starbucks/month.


    What does linking have to do with it?
    Video quality on youtube and google video sucks.. veoh and dailymotion
    offer
    better quality, suitable for video tutorials.
    Flickr seems to be somewhere in between as far as video quality is
    concerned.
    Hosting should be free, as this can be paid for by ads.
    sobriquet, Sep 19, 2008
    #6
  7. sobriquet

    Bruce Lewis Guest

    sobriquet <> writes:

    > Ok, but why are videosharing websites offering virtually unlimited
    > space then? Are they not
    > in it for the money?


    Video sharing sites aren't expected to make money. They're just trying
    to get market share now in hopes of figuring out how to make money
    later. What you need is a photo-sharing site that doesn't expect to
    make money now, like mine.

    --

    http://ourdoings.com/
    An illustrated archive of your doings
    Bruce Lewis, Sep 20, 2008
    #7
  8. sobriquet

    DavidM Guest

    sobriquet wrote:
    > On 19 sep, 21:36, wrote:
    >> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 08:08:49 -0700 (PDT), in rec.photo.digital sobriquet
    >>
    >> <> wrote:
    >>> On 19 sep, 15:38, railfan <> wrote:
    >>>> It's all about the money!
    >>> Ok, but why are videosharing websites offering virtually unlimited
    >>> space then? Are they not
    >>> in it for the money?

    >> How many other sites link to video on YT vs Flickr? Does your local
    >> newspaper's site link to YT or Flickr? Hosting sites are cheap quit your
    >> complaining. less than one cup of java at Starbucks/month.

    >
    > What does linking have to do with it?
    > Video quality on youtube and google video sucks.. veoh and dailymotion
    > offer
    > better quality, suitable for video tutorials.
    > Flickr seems to be somewhere in between as far as video quality is
    > concerned.
    > Hosting should be free, as this can be paid for by ads.


    Add all of your above statements together and you have the answer.
    More links to videos generates more traffic to the videos and therefor
    more exposure to the advertising. More exposure means that YT can charge
    more for the advertising and make more money. Flickr don't put
    advertising on the photo pages, so they don't benefit from heavy
    traffic, it just costs them money.

    90% of the people watching YT have no interest in video quality. Plus,
    google have no interest in providing high quality video because it cost
    them more to host and serve. They want popular short movies that
    generate lots of money from advertisers.
    DavidM, Sep 20, 2008
    #8
  9. sobriquet

    railfan Guest

    On Sep 19, 11:50 am, tony cooper <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:38:10 -0700 (PDT), railfan <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Over the years I've had photos on many, many "free" sites, only to see
    > >them find out there was no money in it, and offering "upgrades" for
    > >monthly fees, or you can have photos on their sites if you buy prints,
    > >or they just folded.  So I now don't believe anything any of them say,
    > >I just have photo albums on several different sites rather than trying
    > >to use one.

    >
    > >It's all about the money!

    >
    > How are you different?  You are changing sites to avoid paying money.
    > --
    > Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida


    Well maybe so, but I did have a site that I liked and when they
    changed to a pay site I paid. Not long after that they went out of
    business - just closed without any notice at all. A while later it
    appears that someone bought up their data and offered to sell
    customers a CD with their photos for $30.00! Thanks but no thanks.
    Think it was PhotoPoint? Don't recall, but I don't want to get burned
    again.

    RR
    railfan, Sep 22, 2008
    #9
  10. sobriquet

    sobriquet Guest

    On 22 sep, 22:11, railfan <> wrote:
    > On Sep 19, 11:50 am, tony cooper <> wrote:
    >
    > > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:38:10 -0700 (PDT), railfan <>
    > > wrote:

    >
    > > >Over the years I've had photos on many, many "free" sites, only to see
    > > >them find out there was no money in it, and offering "upgrades" for
    > > >monthly fees, or you can have photos on their sites if you buy prints,
    > > >or they just folded.  So I now don't believe anything any of them say,
    > > >I just have photo albums on several different sites rather than trying
    > > >to use one.

    >
    > > >It's all about the money!

    >
    > > How are you different?  You are changing sites to avoid paying money.
    > > --
    > > Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

    >
    > Well maybe so, but I did have a  site that I liked and when they
    > changed to a pay site I paid.  Not long after that they went out of
    > business - just closed without any notice at all.  A while later it
    > appears that someone bought up their data and offered to sell
    > customers a CD with their photos for $30.00!  Thanks but no thanks.
    > Think it was PhotoPoint?  Don't recall, but I don't want to get burned
    > again.
    >
    > RR


    I remember photopoint.. as soon as they started charging money I
    ditched them and
    found a better place to share pictures.
    sobriquet, Sep 22, 2008
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RAGS

    Free Automatic Photosharing S'ware

    RAGS, Jan 24, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    276
  2. Ernie Werbel

    Re: $8,000 FREE Limited offer

    Ernie Werbel, Apr 21, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    388
    Ernie Werbel
    Apr 21, 2007
  3. RAGS

    Free Automatic Photosharing S'ware

    RAGS, Jan 24, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    322
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    488
  5. Media Innovationz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    556
    Media Innovationz
    Oct 31, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page