Author Topic: flickr  (Read 15383 times)

Re: flickr
Reply #15 on: May 22, 2013, 08:36:15 AM
seems there's been such an outcry over the change that they're set every pro account to auto renew
Got a link to any release from flickr about that?

Re: flickr
Reply #16 on: May 22, 2013, 14:01:44 PM
seems there's been such an outcry over the change that they're set every pro account to auto renew
Got a link to any release from flickr about that?

I haven't, well not on my PC at work posted that from home last night.  There was an article on somewhere like Cnet I think plus quite a bit on the flickr support forums and twitter.

After using it a bit more the biggest annoyances I've found with it are its slower but not too bad, the location map for photos isn't as easy to get to so I think people aren't geotagging their photos as much and the contacts photos on the landing page when your logged in is far too in your face.  Other than those few things it doesn't seem too bad really just a layout change for the most.

  • Offline zpyder

  • Posts: 6,946
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #17 on: May 22, 2013, 15:44:50 PM
I agree with that pretty much.

Another thing I've noticed is in the groups pages, it switches from the new design back to the older design. Not sure if it's some weird cache issue, or actually meant to be like that. Either way, the lack of consistency adds to the confusion!

Re: flickr
Reply #18 on: May 22, 2013, 21:25:40 PM
http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157633547442506

That's the flickr forum thread for everything, its up to 177 pages, mainly of people who feel they've been ripped off as they've not got an auto-renewing pro account.

Since I can't see the ads I tried looking at flickr through IE since I'm not signed in on there, went to the explore page and it took a while to load up so left it and forgot about it in the background, about 10 minutes ago my PC popped up saying I was running low on memory checked task manager and that IE window was using just over 4gb of memory!  Well done on the remake flickr/yahoo!

I agree with that pretty much.

Another thing I've noticed is in the groups pages, it switches from the new design back to the older design. Not sure if it's some weird cache issue, or actually meant to be like that. Either way, the lack of consistency adds to the confusion!

Does seem to be some pages that are basically the same as the old system, its as if they've done half a job hopefully its only temporary or down to caching but does stink of them wanting to get the redesign out before its done.

  • Offline zpyder

  • Posts: 6,946
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #19 on: June 24, 2013, 15:26:19 PM
I've only just noticed if you hover over your icon in the top right on Flickr it'll tell you how much space you are using.

I'm using 0.036tb of unlimited apparently. I'm surprised at how little that is. I don't know whether it's a calculation glitch due to being "unlimited" or whether flickr compresses pictures when you upload them. Certainly today I uploaded 74 pictures totalling about 300mb, so that "0.036tb" should at least be double that now as it was set to that before I uploaded!

Re: flickr
Reply #20 on: June 24, 2013, 19:15:08 PM
0.036tb isnt that 36 gigs? so your 300 megs won't have touched it.

Re: flickr
Reply #21 on: June 24, 2013, 19:21:14 PM
Yeah 36gigs sounds alot more like it especially for the shed load of photos you've got on there!

Just checked mine and I'm using 0.0022tb so 2.5gb on 250 photos or somewhere about that anyway.

New challenge for anyone, get to 0.1tb, think we might be on a while lol

  • Offline zpyder

  • Posts: 6,946
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #22 on: June 25, 2013, 08:28:15 AM
D'oh! It is indeed.

Though I still think 36gb is mighty small. It works out less than 1mb a photo. Given that I know the last 2000 photos uploaded were all probably at least 3mb in size, I'd have said it should be at least 90gb!


Re: flickr
Reply #23 on: June 25, 2013, 21:34:33 PM
Maybe they utilise compression on their end?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


Re: flickr
Reply #24 on: June 26, 2013, 08:01:33 AM
I thought jpgs were pretty well compressed anyway?

Re: flickr
Reply #25 on: June 26, 2013, 10:13:45 AM
Depends on the settings. Plus different compression algorithms yield different sizes.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


    • Tekforums.net - It's new and improved!
  • Offline Clock'd 0Ne

  • Clockedtastic
  • Posts: 10,887
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #26 on: June 26, 2013, 12:31:08 PM
They must reduce the quality of the JPEGs substantially then if that's the case.

  • Offline zpyder

  • Posts: 6,946
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #27 on: June 26, 2013, 16:13:12 PM
I've always suspected they tweak the photos somehow, as sometimes images seem to have a bit more punch than in Adobe bridge/windows.

They won't be using some kind of compression that allows them to compress stored images but display them in original form? I've just checked, and a 15mb file I uploaded today downloaded from flickr at the same size, so the "original" hasn't been lost?!

Or could it be that there's some policy of old photos being compressed down and reduced in size?

Re: flickr
Reply #28 on: June 26, 2013, 17:45:10 PM
Maybe its something akin to "disk compression" in NTFS. No idea how their storing the images and there are lots of dark arts for compression systems.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


    • Tekforums.net - It's new and improved!
  • Offline Clock'd 0Ne

  • Clockedtastic
  • Posts: 10,887
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
Re: flickr
Reply #29 on: June 26, 2013, 17:57:37 PM
I play around a lot with compression, even LZMA2 at the highest level won't compress JPGs or video very much at all (we're talking a few MBs over GBs of data) and that is very resource intensive, they certainly won't be doing anything that complex with the images server-side. They must just have an awful lot of cloud space!

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.