A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

picasaweb vs google photos



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 4th 19, 09:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default picasaweb vs google photos


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).
  #2  
Old January 5th 19, 12:19 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,627
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On Jan 4, 2019, sobriquet wrote
(in ):


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


The free Flickr option of 1000 images is reasonable, particularly for most
non-pro photographers. You can still share individual images and albums. You
just can’t accumulate a massive library of images, and expect them to host
a collection in excess of 1000 images for nothing. After all, just how long
do you anticipate storing you images for sharing without culling down below
the 100 image limit?

There are costs that they are not compelled to absorb, just because you
don’t like the idea of paying for anything. So my suggestion, is reconsider
a limited (1000 image) free Flickr account, and work within the limitations
to share images and/or galleries/albums.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

  #3  
Old January 5th 19, 12:29 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,627
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On Jan 4, 2019, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jan 4, 2019, sobriquet wrote
(in ):


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


The free Flickr option of 1000 images is reasonable, particularly for most
non-pro photographers. You can still share individual images and albums. You
just can’t accumulate a massive library of images, and expect them to host
a collection in excess of 1000 images for nothing. After all, just how long
do you anticipate storing your images for sharing without culling down below
the 100 image limit?


....er, 1000 image limit.

There are costs that they are not compelled to absorb, just because you
don’t like the idea of paying for anything. So my suggestion, is reconsider
a limited (1000 image) free Flickr account, and work within the limitations
to share images and/or galleries/albums.


--
Regards,
Savageduck

  #4  
Old January 5th 19, 01:18 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at 12:19:12 AM UTC+1, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 4, 2019, sobriquet wrote
(in ):


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


The free Flickr option of 1000 images is reasonable, particularly for most
non-pro photographers. You can still share individual images and albums. You
just can’t accumulate a massive library of images, and expect them to host
a collection in excess of 1000 images for nothing. After all, just how long
do you anticipate storing you images for sharing without culling down below
the 100 image limit?

There are costs that they are not compelled to absorb, just because you
don’t like the idea of paying for anything. So my suggestion, is reconsider
a limited (1000 image) free Flickr account, and work within the limitations
to share images and/or galleries/albums.

--
Regards,
Savageduck


These costs can't be the reason. Google still offers *unlimited*
storage space (provided they can compress the jpg files) for
free.
Maybe they will eventually add a feature allowing you to share
a link to an overview of shared albums. It just mystifies me
why they haven't already done so, but I guess they wanted to
orient the service more towards backup and private sharing
where it's more typical that you'd like to share a particular
album with friends. Perhaps it was also a way for them to
avoid all the copyright hassle they get exposed to
when offering people more freedom to share stuff as people
typically share stuff rather indiscriminately.

The 1000 images limit at flickr is unreasonable in proportion
to the 1 TB limit for free accounts. 1000 images is a tiny
fraction of 1 TB, so they kind of went from a generous free
amount of space to a rather crammed amount of free space.
But I guess the pendulum swings back and forth.. probably
at some point in the future they switch back to offering
more space, as disk space generally only gets cheaper.
  #5  
Old January 5th 19, 01:34 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at 1:18:21 AM UTC+1, sobriquet wrote:
On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at 12:19:12 AM UTC+1, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 4, 2019, sobriquet wrote
(in ):


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


The free Flickr option of 1000 images is reasonable, particularly for most
non-pro photographers. You can still share individual images and albums.. You
just can’t accumulate a massive library of images, and expect them to host
a collection in excess of 1000 images for nothing. After all, just how long
do you anticipate storing you images for sharing without culling down below
the 100 image limit?

There are costs that they are not compelled to absorb, just because you
don’t like the idea of paying for anything. So my suggestion, is reconsider
a limited (1000 image) free Flickr account, and work within the limitations
to share images and/or galleries/albums.

--
Regards,
Savageduck


These costs can't be the reason. Google still offers *unlimited*
storage space (provided they can compress the jpg files) for
free.
Maybe they will eventually add a feature allowing you to share
a link to an overview of shared albums. It just mystifies me
why they haven't already done so, but I guess they wanted to
orient the service more towards backup and private sharing
where it's more typical that you'd like to share a particular
album with friends. Perhaps it was also a way for them to
avoid all the copyright hassle they get exposed to
when offering people more freedom to share stuff as people
typically share stuff rather indiscriminately.

The 1000 images limit at flickr is unreasonable in proportion
to the 1 TB limit for free accounts. 1000 images is a tiny
fraction of 1 TB, so they kind of went from a generous free
amount of space to a rather crammed amount of free space.
But I guess the pendulum swings back and forth.. probably
at some point in the future they switch back to offering
more space, as disk space generally only gets cheaper.


https://www.howtogeek.com/133062/the...than-facebook/

Maybe shutterfly is an option.. they seem to offer unlimited storage
space as well and supposedly it's easier to share albums there.

Did anyone try this who has a reasonable selection of albums to
get an impression what that looks like?

I'm looking for something similar to the way picasaweb allowed one
to share a range of albums (a nice bonus would be if it has
the ability to shuffle pics in a slideshow):

https://get.google.com/albumarchive/...46033118696357

My flickr account has some albums, but I tend to use it more for
digital art lately.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/thcganja/
  #6  
Old January 5th 19, 10:13 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
RJH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 183
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On 04/01/2019 20:31, sobriquet wrote:

Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


I don't have an obvious answer to your questions beyond those published
by Flickr. Google's sharing and compression arrangements are I'd have
thought to do with its business model, and monetising data.

I used Flickr a lot. I used it well within the new 1000 pics limit - the
biggest limitation for me came recently with the removal of Photos (the
Mac picture manager and basic editor) integration.

So I now use a 200GB cloud service from Apple - about $3/month. Just
makes life simpler, and I can use it to back up other data. An example:

https://www.icloud.com/sharedalbum/#B0z532ODWLFRHJ

--
Cheers, Rob
  #7  
Old January 5th 19, 05:51 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
newshound
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 293
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On 05/01/2019 00:18, sobriquet wrote:
On Saturday, January 5, 2019 at 12:19:12 AM UTC+1, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 4, 2019, sobriquet wrote
(in ):


Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


The free Flickr option of 1000 images is reasonable, particularly for most
non-pro photographers. You can still share individual images and albums. You
just can’t accumulate a massive library of images, and expect them to host
a collection in excess of 1000 images for nothing. After all, just how long
do you anticipate storing you images for sharing without culling down below
the 100 image limit?

There are costs that they are not compelled to absorb, just because you
don’t like the idea of paying for anything. So my suggestion, is reconsider
a limited (1000 image) free Flickr account, and work within the limitations
to share images and/or galleries/albums.

--
Regards,
Savageduck


These costs can't be the reason. Google still offers *unlimited*
storage space (provided they can compress the jpg files) for
free.


Which simply tells you that Google is better at monetarising the
service. A terabyte of disk space still has to be paid for.
  #8  
Old January 5th 19, 08:30 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
sobriquet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 358
Default picasaweb vs google photos

On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 9:31:16 PM UTC+1, sobriquet wrote:
Hi.

In the past I've used picasaweb and what I liked about it was
that when I was sharing an album of pictures, people could easily
click on a link to get to an overview of all albums shared by me.

I wonder why this is no longer seems possible with google
photos. I can share a particular album via a link, but then
the person receiving this link doesn't seem to have any way to
get to an overview of all albums I'm sharing on google photos.
It feels like google is imposing some unreasonable restrictions
on my freedom to share pictures.
Sure, some people might prefer it if they can share an album
without giving people access to all the pictures or all the
albums they share, but why is this not an option so people
get to pick what suits their preferences?

Google photos offers a lot of free space (especially considering
that flickr recently dramatically downgraded their free photo
sharing space from 1 TB to something like 1000 pictures), but
it seems to be kind of useless for photosharing if you can't
even do something basic like providing an overview of shared
albums via a link (like it used to be possible via picasa
webalbums).


In the google photo communities someone mentioned the option of using
google docs for a basic overview of multiple shared albums.

https://support.google.com/photos/thread/918348
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
issues with picasaweb Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 0 May 17th 12 03:22 PM
issues with picasaweb Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 0 May 17th 12 01:42 AM
Phooto the ultimate picasaweb hack... kobayaschi Digital Photography 0 September 25th 07 12:30 PM
Try to use Google to organize your photos and videos [email protected] Digital Photography 13 May 9th 06 07:31 PM
Folks, why not google-organize your photos? [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 1 May 8th 06 11:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.