Facebook has just reased the new photo interface. We are seeing it in London though it may be unavailable in some domains. Frankly you now pretty much have everything you got from Flickr. So the question is if this is a Flickr killer?
Well anonymous, what don't you get with this new system that you get with Flickr.
I have evaluated Flickr and found major problems:
1. Storage limitations without subscription (Not in FB) 2. Limited Social Networking tools like IM (Not in FB) 3. Picnick gives you "editing" but it is no better than Picasa, not really a GIMP killer. 4. The only thing that I can find Flickr has is metadata. I profoundly have doubt about metadata.
I confidently predict that given already Facebook is loading up every 2 months more documents then Flickr has upload since opening shop, that this improved interface will be the death blow of Flickr.
Eh. I seem to have the new FB photo viewing interface, and it doesn't seem to add anything new other than a download link. I don't think it really competes with flickr (yet, anyway). You can't look up pictures via geotagging, there are no public pools, it's hard to actually find any pictures... FB's interface is nice for viewing pictures from your contacts, but that's it.
And I don't understand your point about editing. How is flickr competing with teh gimp? I didn't see any photo editing support in FB, at least when I looked at my old pics, so what's your point?
Actually, uploading photos to a group is similar to uploading to a public pool. I'm just still not convinced that this is somehow any better than flickr.
Editing would be a nice feature. Flickr provides editing and FB does not, but the Flickr feature is not very rich.
Not only is uploading to a group in Facebook like posting to a public group in Flickr, but unlike Flickr there is a really good chance a lot of people will see your photos in a Facebook group. If you are looking to promote images that is a no brainer, FB is way way better.
Geo-tagging is not in the Facebook yet and is in the Flickr. But firstly the Flickrs uses the truly terrible Yahoo mapping. Also with check in in Facebook the framework for an extremely rich geo-tagging system is in place and will very soon blow Flickr out of the water.
As for search, there is the metadata in Flickr that you don't have with FB, but I very rarely look for a picture and when I do I use Google images not Flickr. Facebook gives me the ability to see the pictures of my contacts, family and friends, none of my family and few of my friends use Flickr so I find it far easier to "find" images I want on Facebook.
Frankly I think the numbers speak for themselves. Every single image Flickr has seen uploaded in its own history is equal to 2 months of uploads to Facebook. Clearly by about 30 to 1 users select FB to store and share images.
Im more impressed by the 24 Tabs...;)
ReplyDelete"You pretty much have everything you got from Flickr"? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteWell anonymous, what don't you get with this new system that you get with Flickr.
ReplyDeleteI have evaluated Flickr and found major problems:
1. Storage limitations without subscription (Not in FB)
2. Limited Social Networking tools like IM (Not in FB)
3. Picnick gives you "editing" but it is no better than Picasa, not really a GIMP killer.
4. The only thing that I can find Flickr has is metadata. I profoundly have doubt about metadata.
I confidently predict that given already Facebook is loading up every 2 months more documents then Flickr has upload since opening shop, that this improved interface will be the death blow of Flickr.
Eh. I seem to have the new FB photo viewing interface, and it doesn't seem to add anything new other than a download link. I don't think it really competes with flickr (yet, anyway). You can't look up pictures via geotagging, there are no public pools, it's hard to actually find any pictures... FB's interface is nice for viewing pictures from your contacts, but that's it.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't understand your point about editing. How is flickr competing with teh gimp? I didn't see any photo editing support in FB, at least when I looked at my old pics, so what's your point?
Actually, uploading photos to a group is similar to uploading to a public pool. I'm just still not convinced that this is somehow any better than flickr.
ReplyDeleteEditing would be a nice feature. Flickr provides editing and FB does not, but the Flickr feature is not very rich.
ReplyDeleteNot only is uploading to a group in Facebook like posting to a public group in Flickr, but unlike Flickr there is a really good chance a lot of people will see your photos in a Facebook group. If you are looking to promote images that is a no brainer, FB is way way better.
Geo-tagging is not in the Facebook yet and is in the Flickr. But firstly the Flickrs uses the truly terrible Yahoo mapping. Also with check in in Facebook the framework for an extremely rich geo-tagging system is in place and will very soon blow Flickr out of the water.
As for search, there is the metadata in Flickr that you don't have with FB, but I very rarely look for a picture and when I do I use Google images not Flickr. Facebook gives me the ability to see the pictures of my contacts, family and friends, none of my family and few of my friends use Flickr so I find it far easier to "find" images I want on Facebook.
Frankly I think the numbers speak for themselves. Every single image Flickr has seen uploaded in its own history is equal to 2 months of uploads to Facebook. Clearly by about 30 to 1 users select FB to store and share images.