|
|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Jun 30, 2017 5:12:37 GMT -8
All of my Photobucket links refer to a new link to upgrade your service. They are no longer allowing photo linking to your free account but forcing you to join P500 that, as the number says, is $400 or more for a year. Boy are a lot of us screwed by this. I have just about 2k photos that site linked to several, no many, on line postings I've made. Get used to the big grey box, time has run out. This is effective immediately. Time to learn how to photo post on the forums.  |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jun 30, 2017 5:38:33 GMT -8
Or find another photo host. Looks like Photobucket wants to get rid of all the casual people and charging $500 will do that; that's way out of my budget for what I use it for. If they charged a modest monthly fee, like 8 to 10 type of fee, they could probably keep a lot of people but $500 should shed a large percentage of their users - which apparently is what they must be wanting; it will limit customers to mainly professionals who need it and can pay it as part of a "cost of doing business". Since I'm not making money with photo's - goodbye Photobucket.
In a way this will be a good thing since photobucket is blocked at work anyway so it's always been a disadvantage. Other photo hosts are not blocked. This will force me to find a different host and that will actually be a good thing, even if a hassle. I've already been hating them more and more as it is. Good riddance Photobucket.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Jun 30, 2017 5:38:50 GMT -8
Or use imgur, or some other hosting site.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Jun 30, 2017 6:01:19 GMT -8
Or use imgur, or some other hosting site. Test of Imgur site.  |
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Jun 30, 2017 6:51:18 GMT -8
Looking at Photobucket's history is quite interesting.
The founders of Photobucket sold it to Fox Media (owned by News Corp.) in 2007 for $300 million. In 2009 News Corp. sold Photobucket to Seattle-based start-up Ontela for $60 million less $29 million of incurred debt ($31 million net). Ontela renamed itself Photobucket and is the current owner. It's investors are a group of venture capital funds.
It's hard to say what Photobucket's real market value is today but it looks as if the investors want a higher ROI after holding onto Photobucket for the last 8 years. Whether their high-pricing strategy works or not remains to be seen.
While Photobucket has been good for its users it appears it hasn't been a good investment for any of its buyers.
|
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Jun 30, 2017 7:19:15 GMT -8
A quick survey of the archived SPF threads shows a significant number of posts now missing their photos, replaced by Photobucket's "ransom" image (my term for this).
It is possible to post photos here directly but if all photos are posted directly the forum will run out of storage space on a regular basis. Perhaps Donnell could comment on whether more space is readily available and at what price?
The sample Imgur image Christian has posted looks promising. It does appear a bit 'un-sharp' but that may just be the original photo's problem. Some more samples would be useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Jun 30, 2017 8:48:06 GMT -8
The sample image jonklein611 has posted looks promising. It does appear a bit 'un-sharp' but that may just be the original photo's problem. Some more samples would be useful. Don't blame jonklein611. Original is soft. I grabbed it to see how much compression would be used (A lot!) and how both red and yellow would fair. Red good. Yellow darkened a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Jun 30, 2017 11:07:29 GMT -8
Depending on how you upload stuff to imgur, you get different results. Here's one I found when browsing the other day:  |
|
|
|
Post by onequiknova on Jul 3, 2017 9:06:27 GMT -8
This is going to render the project archives useless.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 3, 2017 14:58:49 GMT -8
This is going to render the project archives useless. That had crossed my mind, and alot of things useless. SFF archives too. Thanks photobucket and good bye. |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Jul 3, 2017 18:14:10 GMT -8
 Posted from Photobucket. When is this transition supposed to take place? |
|
|
|
Post by onequiknova on Jul 3, 2017 18:42:34 GMT -8
From what I've read, they're going after the larger bandwidth users first, but it will eventually affect everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 4, 2017 2:12:38 GMT -8
i haven't read it. But i've been a paying user since basically its inception. I can't remember how much I pay but now im going to lose it or pay $500?
|
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 4, 2017 2:17:14 GMT -8
I have the plus 50 account and now i can't link pics? WTF! I can't even access anything from the main website when im at work. There app is completely useless aswell.
I have 49gb of pics on Photobucket. I need to get them off and onto flickr ASAP!
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Jul 4, 2017 2:58:39 GMT -8
I think I'm going to be proactive and delete my stuff, and close my account with them today. I've already begun downloading everything, when it's complete, I'll delete the account.
|
|
|
|
Post by areibel on Jul 4, 2017 4:38:40 GMT -8
That's what I did, luckily I only had about 1 gig of pics on there. I've been a paying member for years, I think it was $25 or something but it wasn't bad. But $400 is way out of line and the ads on there were getting terrible. So I bailed out before they decided to hold my pics hostage or something.
You need to send them an email to stop the recurring charge, supposedly that switches your account to a "free" one but I doubt they're going to give you much with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Jul 4, 2017 5:15:59 GMT -8
That's what I did, luckily I only had about 1 gig of pics on there. I've been a paying member for years, I think it was $25 or something but it wasn't bad. But $400 is way out of line and the ads on there were getting terrible. So I bailed out before they decided to hold my pics hostage or something. You need to send them an email to stop the recurring charge, supposedly that switches your account to a "free" one but I doubt they're going to give you much with that. You get 2Gb free, no linking. |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 4, 2017 7:59:06 GMT -8
I tried to check how much I had used, but it only said 15%. My photo's are still working but I am planning on switching hosts.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevef45 on Jul 4, 2017 20:43:31 GMT -8
Use your own hosted domain. You are in control. And no ads. how do you do that? If I can get onto photobucket tonight at work i am going to try and get as much as possible to flickr |
|
|
|
Post by spookyac47 on Jul 4, 2017 21:17:59 GMT -8
Use your own hosted domain. You are in control. And no ads. Some hosted domains state that they are not to be used solely for storage . . . but guess it depends on how much one is willing to pay for the hosting service. Fortunately I have not used Photobucket that much and don't recall if I even have something stored there. I used Bluehost for my website . . . |
|
|
|
Post by roadkill on Jul 5, 2017 4:42:22 GMT -8
They don't call it Photosuckit for nuthin'...
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Jul 5, 2017 9:19:07 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 5, 2017 9:46:33 GMT -8
I've already created an imgur account. My photo hosting needs are relatively low compared to many so hopefully that will make a good replacement for PB. I'll have to take some time to pull my PB photo's down and re-upload the ones I need to the new host.
|
|
|
|
Post by onequiknova on Jul 6, 2017 14:47:31 GMT -8
I got the email from Photobucket today. I would assume my build threads are useless at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by antoniofp45 on Jul 11, 2017 10:37:49 GMT -8
I received the email recently and, at first, thought it was spam. Then found out it was legitimate.
My thoughts are of the many photos I've posted on this and several other forums regarding metalizing, airbrushing, and prototype shots. My thanks to those of you that told me that they were helpful with your modeling.
Not certain which route I'm going to take so I'll research the pros and cons of: Trainboard, Flikr, imgbb, and Imgur. Am open to suggestions as all I want to do is post photos on forums, nothing else.
I am glad that I still have all of my original photos on my computer and on external backup.
I'm still hoping that PB owners "might" have a change of heart as the backlash is coming from around the globe.
End of venting.
|
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Jul 18, 2017 4:03:18 GMT -8
Is the difference between linking and third party hosting is the following ...... linking - need to click to see the photo which will direct you to the photobucket webpage and 3rd party hosting is seeing the photo directly on another website (i.e. here)?
|
|
|
|
Post by jonklein611 on Jul 18, 2017 4:13:36 GMT -8
Is the difference between linking and third party hosting is the following ...... linking - need to click to see the photo which will direct you to the photobucket webpage and 3rd party hosting is seeing the photo directly on another website (i.e. here)? Yes. 3rd party hosting is where you insert the URL / pic code and the picture displays on this forum page. It uses bandwidth from the hosting server (imgur, photobucket, flickr, etc.) to present the image. Every time the page is loaded by user (unless cached) the image is re-pulled from the host. This can get costly for the host as bandwidth gets expensive. Simply providing a link to the image page may or may not be considered 3 party hosting (or hot linking) depending on the host server's policies. |
|
|
|
Post by alcoc430 on Jul 18, 2017 9:32:32 GMT -8
Is the difference between linking and third party hosting is the following ...... linking - need to click to see the photo which will direct you to the photobucket webpage and 3rd party hosting is seeing the photo directly on another website (i.e. here)? Yes. 3rd party hosting is where you insert the URL / pic code and the picture displays on this forum page. It uses bandwidth from the hosting server (imgur, photobucket, flickr, etc.) to present the image. Every time the page is loaded by user (unless cached) the image is re-pulled from the host. This can get costly for the host as bandwidth gets expensive. Simply providing a link to the image page may or may not be considered 3 party hosting (or hot linking) depending on the host server's policies. oK Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Jul 18, 2017 12:56:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Jul 18, 2017 13:19:12 GMT -8
Nobody is losing any photo's but if you want them to show up in posts, you'll have to go through the time consuming task of uploading them to a new host.
|
|
