Best Photo Managment Site?
(PeteCresswell)
Got a lot of photos in ThumbsPlus, but I'd also like to upload some of them to a
web-based service.
I'm biased towards one that I pay for if only because it increases the chances
that it won't go "poof!" one day. Is this a reasonable bias?
The only two I've looked at so far are Flikr and SmugMug.
Flikr seems tb more blogish and SmugMug seems tb more professional.
SmugMug appears to have an edge vis-a-vis uploading ease and variety of
presentations.
Anybody care to tout their favorite(s)?
--
PeteCresswell
hel...@stanford.edu
Phanfare.com. Do a google search on "hellman phanfare" and you'll find
a number of posts, including one today to a similar question. Great
service.
(PeteCresswell)
>Phanfare.com. Do a google search on "hellman phanfare" and you'll find
>a number of posts, including one today to a similar question. Great
>service.
The ability for others to download the original looks like a killer feature to
me.
I didn't find their UI that great though - as if they are still in the process
of putting it all together.
--
PeteCresswell
Bruce Lewis
> I'm basically a dilettante who knows nothing.
>
> Got a lot of photos in ThumbsPlus, but I'd also like to upload some of them to a
> web-based service.
Are these photos where each stands on its own individual artistic merit,
or are they photos that fit together to tell a story (vacation, kids
growing up, etc.)? There are many good options in the former category,
and one good option (mine) in the latter.
> I'm biased towards one that I pay for if only because it increases the
> chances that it won't go "poof!" one day. Is this a reasonable bias?
It's a reasonable bias, but probably not for the reason you cite. More
important is that when you hold the purse, you pull the strings. If you
use an advertising-based service, you're the product being sold and the
advertisers are the customers. If you use a prints-based service, the
money pulls them to keep you from downloading full-size images.
--
http://ourdoings.com/ Easily organize and disseminate news and
photos for your family or group.
hel...@stanford.edu
> The ability for others to download the original looks like a killer feature to
> me.
>
> I didn't find their UI that great though - as if they are still in the process
> of putting it all together.
Pete,
Yes, the ability to download full resolution pictures is a killer
feature and clearly something missing on sites oriented toward selling
prints. I used photoaccess.com in the early days because they allowed
it, but then they discontinued it -- at least for non members, and many
of my visitors did not want to join yet one more web site.
You're right about the user interface. It's a work in progress, but
they're very open to suggestions and were already thinking about most
that I suggested. One that I'd like to see is the ability for a visitor
to download an entire album, rather than having to choose each picture.
There is a bandwidth issue (i.e., cost) there, but I wouldn't mind if
they charged the visitor a small fee. A penny per picture would
probably cover their costs, and five cents would be a great profit
margin. Either one would be enough to prevent the equivalent of reverse
spam.
Also, for what it's worth, a friend of mine who is an expert at
computer optimization (a former Stanford Prof) tells me they're
uploading strategy is sweet. My experience so far agrees. It seems to
work effortlessly.
Martin
hel...@stanford.edu
> The ability for others to download the original looks like a killer feature to
> me.
>
> I didn't find their UI that great though - as if they are still in the process
> of putting it all together.
Pete,