# Flickr vs. Photobucket



## Ocho_1

May be a dumb question.....but I've noticed that the vast majority of you guys use Flickr, as opposed to Photobucket.

Is there a specific reason for this? I mean are there any clear differences that makes Flickr a better place to host pics than Photobucket?


----------



## EIngerson

I like flickr because you have more control of the layout. I have an account on both though.


----------



## cgipson1

both are fine as long as you resize your photos to the size you are going to post... before you upload them. The compression algorithms they use to save disk space / bandwidth suck.. and will make your photos look like crap, IF you allow them to compress them.

Flickr has the advantage of being able to post larger images here... sometimes that helps with detail.


----------



## Joel_W

I have both accounts, but prefer Flickr over Photobucket. For posting pictures here (my only photo site), I've found that they're most consistant to the original. I had problems with pictures looking under exposed and slightly less contrast posted from Photobucket. the same pictures posted from Flickr didn't have that problem. I do agree with CGibson1 that it makes a difference to resize yourself before uploading.


----------



## Vipor

Good question Ocho.  I myself have always used Photobucket. I've always wondered as well what the advantage (or perhaps disadvantage) would be on Flickr. I just recently started an account on Flickr to see how it fares against Photobucket but have yet to upload any pics to it. Hope to see much discussion on here.


----------



## Joel_W

Vipor said:


> Good question Ocho.  I myself have always used Photobucket. I've always wondered as well what the advantage (or perhaps disadvantage) would be on Flickr. I just recently started an account on Flickr to see how it fares against Photobucket but have yet to upload any pics to it. Hope to see much discussion on here.



Why not try an experiment to see what the differences are viewed on your monitor. Upload the same picture to both and view them. Then, upload them here, and see what they look like. Now re-size those pictures to 1024xXXX and upload them again, to both sites, then to the test thread. Look for the differences. I'm sure many of us will be interested to see the results as well.


----------



## Joey_Ricard

Flickr is not just a photo storage site. There is the social aspect there that photobucket does not have. For my use, I am part of a small group of folks that share photography interests with (landscapes, nature etc) part of groups and such. If you are talking about just storing photos, either PB or flickr will do.


----------



## KmH

I prefer Photobucket over Flickr and have acounts at both. Flickr looks to me like a high school kid's blog page programming class project - that only got a C+ grade.

Flickr may enjoy more visibility because of the SPAM they add at the bottom of photos linked to there. 

A disadvantage of Flickr is they don't forward the photo EXIF data along with the photo. Anyone wanting to see the EXIF info has to go to Flicker and do a couple more clicks to see the EXIF info. That's not to cool.


----------



## Big Mike

Also note that you can host photos in your user gallery, here on The Photo Forum.  And as of recently, you can now upload photo directly.

As for Photobucket vs Flickr....I would prefer that people use Photobucket.  The reason is that the firewall here at my day job, blocks images from Flickr.  So if I want to see those photos, I have to copy the URL and then use a proxy site.  It's a PITA.

Of course, another option is to just host the photos yourself.  Many people these days (especially photographers) have their own web site.  You can just upload photos to your site and link from there.  That's what I do, most of the time.


----------



## bazooka

I have a paid account on both.  I use photobucket for posting quick pics that I only intend to use in forums/ebay/craigslist.  It's easy to upload and get the link, although it's usefullness is basically gone now that I have my own home server.  I originally used it to host pics for one of my websites.

Flickr is where I put my photographs.  It's nice to be in groups where other people are posting similar content.  It helps to compare quality and get some new ideas.  Navigation is easier and it's a much more professional interface.


----------



## Overread

I use both but flickr is very much my "These are Photographs" place whilst photobucket is my "dumpsite" for general snaps or screen shots or anything else random that I want hosted online.

Flickr is geared up mostly for a paid account holder, you get far more sorting options and you also get to see more than your last 200 photos in your collection (older photos still appear in any links you made and still remain in flickr, you just can't see or organise them on a free account - so it just shows your newest 200). 
Flickr is the one I use the most and I prefer it overall, the interface is less advertising spammy compared to photobucket and it also has some useful community additions (yes yes there are a heck tonne of "awards" groups but there are also some very good and informative groups inside flickr if you search around for them). 

Flickr also does preserve the EXIF info on your photo, but only on the originally uploaded photo size, all of the auto generated resized versions flickr makes of your photo will not contain EXIF info, however this can be accessed from the details tab on flickr (provided of course that the photo, when uploaded, had EXIF info).


----------



## o hey tyler

I use Minus - Free Image and File Sharing because it's free, has 10gb of storage, and doesn't mangle your photos. 

Occasionally it has a rough patch where they're updating the site and things get slow, but it's never down for an extended period. I prefer it over both Flickr or Photobucket because it's easy to use. You just drag images from your computer onto the webpage and they'll upload.


----------



## Ocho_1

I mean, I have an account with both, but I've historically used Photobucket a lot more. Just seemed easier to imbed pics in forums & stuff like that.


----------



## bhop

Joey_Ricard said:


> Flickr is not just a photo storage site. There is the social aspect there that photobucket does not have. For my use, I am part of a small group of folks that share photography interests with (landscapes, nature etc) part of groups and such. If you are talking about just storing photos, either PB or flickr will do.



This ^


----------



## Mo.

Is this a trick question?


----------



## xj0hnx

Photobucket is more of an image dump for storage and linking, where as, Flickr is more of a community, and a "portfolio" with socializing, and networking.


----------



## Ocho_1

xj0hnx said:


> Photobucket is more of an image dump for storage and linking, where as, Flickr is more of a community, and a "portfolio" with* socializing, and networking*.




oh, I see. guess that's why I use Photobucket more......I'm anti-social


----------



## Forkie

I prefer Flickr because of the social aspect.  I also like the way it displays photos.  I generally don't have as many compression issues as other people seem to be talking about.  I also use it as a photo dump rather than a portfolio so it has my best and worst efforts in it!


----------



## Thunder_o_b

I don't care for flicker at all. Been using PB for a while now and like it. It does retain the image info of my shots, and see no change from the original and the one that is up loaded from PB. But the best bet is to have your own site and up load from there..Something I gotta get around to.


----------



## Josh66

Forkie said:


> I prefer Flickr because of the social aspect.  I also like the way it displays photos.  I generally don't have as many compression issues as other people seem to be talking about.  I also use it as a photo dump rather than a portfolio so it has my best and worst efforts in it!


Pretty much exactly the same for me.

I also pretty much dump everything there.  I figure, if I'm paying for unlimited storage, I might as well use it.  So far, I probably have about 45GB worth of pictures there.

The groups there are great too (if you join the right ones).  I find that when I have questions about something, I can find the answer on Flickr faster than anywhere else.


----------



## photographyxfactor

I knew about photobucket before I knew about flickr, but I would  probably switch to flickr if I didn't have so many pictures on  photobucket.  I like the layout of flickr and its simplicity.   Photobucket has too much going on with it.


----------



## Soulz3urn3lack

What about Minus - Free Image and File Sharing

Any consensus on that?  I've been using it and it seems to be just as nice.


----------



## shuttervelocity

I'm glad this question came up.  As far as this forum is concerned, not sure if I'm doing something wrong, but I am unable to post a picture in a thread from flickr.  In PB, I copy the link to my picture, and in a thread, I can insert the picture easily.  The same link from Flickr, it says 'Invalid URL'.


----------



## Joel_W

shuttervelocity said:


> I'm glad this question came up.  As far as this forum is concerned, not sure if I'm doing something wrong, but I am unable to post a picture in a thread from flickr.  In PB, I copy the link to my picture, and in a thread, I can insert the picture easily.  The same link from Flickr, it says 'Invalid URL'.




  For flickr pictures just left click the picture. You'll see a "share" tab appear above the picture to the left side. Open it. At the bottom of the drop down box highlight BBC, and select medium size. Copy all the info in the box. Paste that in your post. You don't need to do anything else. Go to preview and check. If you did it correctly, your picture is now in your post.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

I use them both and like neither.  I'm about to _try 500px_


----------



## shuttervelocity

Got it!  Thanks!  



Joel_W said:


> shuttervelocity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm glad this question came up.  As far as this forum is concerned, not sure if I'm doing something wrong, but I am unable to post a picture in a thread from flickr.  In PB, I copy the link to my picture, and in a thread, I can insert the picture easily.  The same link from Flickr, it says 'Invalid URL'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For flickr pictures just left click the picture. You'll see a "share" tab appear above the picture to the left side. Open it. At the bottom of the drop down box highlight BBC, and select medium size. Copy all the info in the box. Paste that in your post. You don't need to do anything else. Go to preview and check. If you did it correctly, your picture is now in your post.
Click to expand...


----------



## gerardo2068

Thanks!


----------



## o hey tyler

Soulz3urn3lack said:


> What about Minus - Free Image and File Sharing
> 
> Any consensus on that?  I've been using it and it seems to be just as nice.



See: 



o hey tyler said:


> I use Minus - Free Image and File Sharing because it's free, has 10gb of storage, and doesn't mangle your photos.
> 
> Occasionally it has a rough patch where they're updating the site and things get slow, but it's never down for an extended period. I prefer it over both Flickr or Photobucket because it's easy to use. You just drag images from your computer onto the webpage and they'll upload.


----------



## greybeard

I use Flickr because it is the one I know how to use.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan

I have both, only use photobucket for hosting. 

Aside from the "social aspect" of flickr (which I don't really care about) which site does thebest for providing a non-mangled images to sites like this? 

I don't know why one would say that Photobucket is confusing. You upload an image and click albums to view it. You can grab a direct link within a few a seconds and can upload multiple images at the same time. FlickR is the same way. Both are fine from a UI standpoint. I just want to know which site does the best keeping the hotlinked image true to your edit. 

I agree with Joel. I'd like to see comparisons of Flickr's size reduction alogorithm from full size and pre-resized and the same with photobucket. 

I feel like photobucket doesn't always do the best job.


----------



## Beast95

Nobody has said Imageshack? I use imageshack.... its perfect in my opinion because it is barebones. All you do is upload a picture.

It doesn't compress photos
Saves all EXIF data
Doesn't resize either (unless you ask it to; then it will!)
There are no limits
Unlimited amount of pictures also
Gives you direct links
Easy to share on forums
Easy to manage and delete pictures

....You dont even need an account. I have one, because that way i have access to my files forever. But it's not required.

Why is this not popular, I dont know. But i like it a lot!


----------



## Natalie

Flickr vs. Photobucket is a no-brainer. Photobucket makes your photos look like crap and also owns the rights to your photos once you upload them (read the fine print). IMO, no one who really cares about their photography should be using Photobucket.

As for a comparison, here's the example I normally use. Same exact photo, same exact size, the only difference is the hosting site.

Photobucket:








Flickr:






Huge difference between the two! The Photobucket one looks terrible, like someone smeared Vaseline on my lens. The Flickr one looks like the file I have on my computer.


----------



## Overread

Whatever service you use I always advise people to make the big change in file size themselves. If you're going to be showing or the service will limit you to (say) 1000pixels on the longest side then make the 1000pixel on the longest side file yourself. You can then use your own sharpening codes on that rather than relying on the webservices which (as shown) vary a lot in the quality of code that they use. It also lets you vary sharpening amounts after resizing as some shots will want more or less (again this is an area where web-services are just applying a standard value to each shot regardless of the shots content).


----------



## 480sparky

Natalie said:


> ...... Photobucket....... owns the rights to your photos once you upload them (read the fine print). .........



Yes...... let's.



> You retain all your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or while using Photobucket. This means that *YOU own ALL the Content you post*,


----------



## Natalie

You forgot the rest of it.



> If you make your Content public, you grant us a worldwide,  non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to  copy, distribute, publicly perform (e.g., stream it), publicly display  (e.g., post it elsewhere), reproduce and create derivative works from it  (meaning things based on it), anywhere, whether in print or any kind of  electronic version that exists now or later developed, for any purpose,  including a commercial purpose.
> You are also giving other Users the right to copy, distribute,  publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce and create derivative  works from it via the Site or third party websites or applications (for  example, via services allowing Users to order prints of Content or  t-shirts and similar items containing Content, and via social media  websites).


----------



## Overread

And a few lines down:



> If you make your Content public, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to copy, distribute, publicly perform (e.g., stream it), publicly display (e.g., post it elsewhere), reproduce and create derivative works from it (meaning things based on it), anywhere, whether in print or any kind of electronic version that exists now or later developed, for any purpose, including a commercial purpose.
> 
> You are also giving other Users the right to copy, distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce and create derivative works from it via the Site or third party websites or applications (for example, via services allowing Users to order prints of Content or t-shirts and similar items containing Content, and via social media websites).


Terms of Use - photobucket.com

I notice that its easier to read, but that it now includes transfer of rights not just to them but to any user - of course this is only for public content not private albums and its revoked once you remove content from their services, but it still very grabby. Flickr (as an example) does not make any claims to your work nor copyright/licence transfer (save to grant them permission to display your work in accordance with the services you want - it to allow them to show it online).

edit - I'm getting slow it seems  beaten by a whole minute!


----------



## 480sparky

Key words here:

*If you make your Content public*..........

Don't make your content public. Problem solved.


----------



## bhop

Wow.. glad I never got a photobucket account.


----------



## bhop

480sparky said:


> Key words here:
> 
> *If you make your Content public*..........
> 
> Don't make your content public. Problem solved.



That's the difference I guess.. I like my photos being public via flickr.  I can 'show off' my stuff to lots of people, but I still get to keep the rights to all of it.  I guess if you want to limit who you show your stuff to then photobucket is fine.


----------



## 480sparky

bhop said:


> That's the difference I guess.. I like my photos being public via flickr.  I can 'show off' my stuff to lots of people, but I still get to keep the rights to all of it.  I guess if you want to limit who you show your stuff to then photobucket is fine.



The same is true for FB if you make your Content "Private".  The images I post here are in Private folders, yet you still see it.


----------



## Natalie

480sparky said:


> Key words here:
> 
> *If you make your Content public*..........
> 
> Don't make your content public. Problem solved.



And for that they say:



> Remember: if you share it from the Site, it's no longer private, even if you marked it "private."


So if you show it to anyone, you're granting them and Photobucket the right to basically do whatever they want with the photo. The only way you can avoid their power-hungry terms of use is if you upload it and then don't show it to anyone, which kind of defeats the purpose of hosting the photo on there in the first place. There really isn't a good reason to use Photobucket.


----------



## Overread

480sparky said:


> bhop said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's the difference I guess.. I like my photos being public via flickr.  I can 'show off' my stuff to lots of people, but I still get to keep the rights to all of it.  I guess if you want to limit who you show your stuff to then photobucket is fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same is true for FB if you make your Content "Private".  The images I post here are in Private folders, yet you still see it.
Click to expand...


Aye true, and for photobucket its not too big an issue since the site hasn't as much of a social aspect to it so you can set an account to private and not miss out on much. However if you head over to somewhere like flickr you can have an open account and have anyone catch sight of your work (should you want to).

edit - Nat - ooh that is crafty wording. I missed that, but its sneaky indeed on their part!


----------



## bhop

480sparky said:


> bhop said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's the difference I guess.. I like my photos being public via flickr.  I can 'show off' my stuff to lots of people, but I still get to keep the rights to all of it.  I guess if you want to limit who you show your stuff to then photobucket is fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same is true for FB if you make your Content "Private".  The images I post here are in Private folders, yet you still see it.
Click to expand...


Yeah, but this thread is about Flickr vs Photobucket.. not FB


----------



## ElenaIuliana

an experiment to see the differences sounds great!


----------

