Where do you publish your photos online?

[Brit In New York]

I'm curious what is the main service members use to publish their photos online. I settled on zenfolio (www.markdorosz.zenfolio.com (http://www.markdorosz.zenfolio.com)) and have been very happy with it but was surprised there weren't more competing offerings.

[photogdave]

I voted RFF. I only want to share with you guys!

[photophorous]

I found flickr before I knew about any of these other places, so that's where I am.

[bmattock]

Flickr only. Very easy to embed in other locations from there.

And please - consider the proper use of the apostrophe.

[photogdave]

And please - consider the proper use of the apostrophe.

Every time I bring this up I get into trouble! :rolleyes:

[mich8261]

I mostly "publish" to my MobileMe galleries (formerly .mac account) when i want to limit the audience to those I invite. I also use smugmug, although not very much. With iPhoto's new easy interface with Facebook and Flickr I foresee that I will do more open publishing.

[Disaster_Area]

I use exposuremanager.com ... easy to use.. and I can edit the templates easily. You can check out my gallery at:
www.jbhildebrand.exposuremanager.com

[Brit In New York]

I also abhor bad punctuation... shame it won't let me correct my title - I can only edit the body of my text :)

[nightfly]

My own website http://www.mediumstudios.com/photo and my own photoblog http://provoke.mediumstudios.com. I put stuff on Flickr but the presentation is so ugly that I don't really like it much. I prefer to curate my images more than it allows.

If you want to do your own photoblog, I highly recommend Pixelpost. I'm a web developer and generally like to code my own stuff from scratch but Pixelpost (http://www.pixelpost.org/ is very well done.

[Al Kaplan]

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com They're not just my best photos. There's a mix of local politics, local historical sights. asignments I've done, and a few paragraphs of text with each one.

[rogue_designer]

my personal work is mostly up at flickr right now.

I do have my own website, but at the moment its being redesigned, and doesn't store much.

[le vrai rdu]

flickr and my website :)

[Chris101]

This should have been a multiple choice poll. I have several galleries on the internet:

blog (http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/) - gallery1 (http://nikongear.com/smf/index.php?action=gallery&g2_itemId=2077) - gallery 2 (http://chris101.nikongear.com/) - gallery 3 (http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/stories/2002/08/19/gallery.html) - projects (http://homepage.mac.com/cheilman1/)

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

My own website, and my blog. The blog serves as a "what's new" page for the main site.

[ssmc]

I use pbase. I like the interface - a lot!

www.pbase.com/smcleod965 (http://www.pbase.com/smcleod965)

So far mostly digital with only a few fim images, and I don't yet have a RF (but probably will soon)

Scott

[DougFord]

I use a simple google blog template to display small pix on-line.
I also use photobucket to link images to in the no words threads here on rff.

[sfb_dot_com]

I do have a presence on Flickr, which I should make more use of, but the level of sycophancy tends to put me off. I'm always working on my own sites, but somehow never quite seem to finish them. They also have blogs, but for a quick and dirty blog, I use the one in Aperture.

On the subject of punctuation - there could be some discussion on the correct usage of hyphens. And the debate on whether one should start a sentence with and, and all that...

Regards

[bmattock]

On the subject of punctuation - there could be some discussion on the correct usage of hyphens. And the debate on whether one should start a sentence with and, and all that...


Indeed. And while it is considered poor grammar to start a sentence with a conjunction (as I just did), it is not a violation of the rules of punctuation.

One should not start a sentence with a conjunction; however, using an an apostrophe to indicate possession where there is no such relationship is simply wrong.

The former would be an infraction, the latter, an error. And one might note that the former has been so misused for so long by so many, that it is now considered considered acceptable by many.

As to the hyphen; it is true that it is a poor substitute for a semi-colon, but it is an affectation of mine - I frequently use it online. Whilst clearly a violation of grammar, it does cleave to the one rule which binds them all - it does not obfuscate the meaning of the sentence in which I use it. Apostrophes which would appear to indicate that 'online' belongs to 'your photo' does.

However, I acknowledge the essential correctness of your gentle reproof.

[photogdave]

That there is some fine punctuatin'!

[nrb]

http://photo.net/photos/nrb

[punkromance]

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Oh yeah, deviantart and flickr.

[Freakscene]

I use the Leica Users Gallery.

Marty

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene

[Silva Lining]

A second vote for PBase, it can be a bit slow at times, but I like it...

http://www.pbase.com/phillbrown

[Ben Blacket]

Maybe Mark is busy actually taking photo's rather than worrying about his punctuation & grammar. He could even be one of those totally far out crazy dudes who goes out & meets real people, socialises & has real life conversations & stuff like that.

[Pickett Wilson]

I thought my office window was just a big screen monitor. Those are real people out there? Really?

[photogdave]

Maybe Mark is busy actually taking photo's rather than worrying about his punctuation & grammar. He could even be one of those totally far out crazy dudes who goes out & meets real people, socialises & has real life conversations & stuff like that.
Your probably write. i shuld go out their more offen; but sum times i loose my confidents - so i just stay on the computer.

[bsdunek]

I am on RFF and APUG galleries, and a few on Shutterfly. I did just start on Parade, which, I think, is quite new. They let you try as many as 30 photos for free. This does not get you all the features, but I think the site looks good.
The address is: http://getparade.com/
The next level is $9/month which is not bad for a not-profit operation (mine, not theirs). I'll see how it works over the next year or so.

[chris000]

I voted 'Something else' because I did not design my own website - I use a template site because I don't really have the skill and the time (or the inclination) to design and maintain a site myself. Much better to spend my time taking and making the images. Link to site below.

[skeletron]

My own site running pixelpost. CSS is really easy to learn, since most of the real coding has already been done for you. Plus, if you don't feel like messing around with it, there are many really nice templates out there you can copy.

[dmr]

For some reason, Flickr just seems overloaded and clumsy to me.

I do photoblog things about every month or so, depending on my mood and the phase of the moon.

My main on-line gallery is here, and I actually like it. It does what I need.

I've been considering getting my own domain and I do have a friend who can help me with that, and he actually showed me a gallery program which I kind of like, but I haven't moved forward with that.

[Prosaic]

krop looks sleek, but at 20$/month for hosting quite expensive

http://krop.com/creativedatabase/

[victor.ghost]

I use pixelpost too... I edited a theme i found online and came up with a pretty decent place to post my pictures... found a good free webhost, used a free domain service and i think it's pretty ok (although I'm thinking o a .com in the near future)

http://notsowellexposed.co.cc/

[imajypsee]

I prefer Pbase because I have a whole lot of flexibility to do a layout for the galleries. There are problems with Pbase, for sure; but I choose to put up with them.
Flickr is a vast morass of clumsy-ness as far as the site layout is concerned. RIGID is how it seems to me. But, it has some groups that have information I want..
I only posted to the RFF gallery because one of the members here kept saying I needed to do so; not may favorite photo venue, either.
As for a blog... I don't have the time...

Mary in SW Florida, USA

[reuno]

I used to love deviantart but its a nightmare to use. I'm on flickr right now and loving it except for their oversharpen feature while I upload files :(

[marknyc]

I do have a presence on Flickr, which I should make more use of, but the level of sycophancy tends to put me off.

You should try the Delteme Uncensored or Del*teme Uncensored groups on Flickr. Unless your shot is truly great or particularly fun, it will be completely abused, sworn at, and you will basically be told you are an imbecile (although your next shot may wow everyone). The good thing is that about one in every five or so comments will give you a plain, unvarnished, honest criticism and those can be great. But, you need a really strong stomach for the group and be aware that they really are 18+ (not usually because of content but of the language -- not enough salt in the sea for these forums).

I pretty much only use Flickr myself. Occasionally sling something up on Leica User Forum, but there you will only get praise usually (even for some frankly awful shots).

[ampguy]

I have about 10K photos on smugmug (paid), but am thinking of moving (or adding) flickr pro. One thing I need is lock down security, basically archiving ability, so locked down images are blocked from search engines, etc. Does flickr pro have this?

[reuno]

I think if you make them private google won't find them... but try to get some infos about the sharpen Flickr apply to pics you upload. I do think they don't add the filter to original size but that could be a mess for you if they do.

[marknyc]

I have about 10K photos on smugmug (paid), but am thinking of moving (or adding) flickr pro. One thing I need is lock down security, basically archiving ability, so locked down images are blocked from search engines, etc. Does flickr pro have this?

You can make your images "private' if you like, but don't know how rock solid secure that is. If they are viewable to the public, i don't know if you have an option to block from search engines. Course, if you did not label or tag them or have a description, they would basically be unlikely to be found by any engines.

[Ken Ford]

pBase for me. I detest Flickr's look and feel - it's a kludge.

[furcafe]

In addition to the privacy settings, you can opt to block all of your photos from search engines on flickr.

You can make your images "private' if you like, but don't know how rock solid secure that is. If they are viewable to the public, i don't know if you have an option to block from search engines. Course, if you did not label or tag them or have a description, they would basically be unlikely to be found by any engines.

[luketrash]

I just sat down over the past weekend to create my own version of a gallery on my personal website.

If any of you are bored, check it out at www.lukehealey.com

If you're REALLY bored, PM me with your thoughts and suggestions ;)

[Vince Lupo]

I have a website for my work (mainly commercial).

Even if you're not bored, and have much better things to do, have a look.

Actually, you should probably put it at the top of your list.

Heck, even hire me!

[wgerrard]

You can make your images "private' if you like, but don't know how rock solid secure that is. If they are viewable to the public, i don't know if you have an option to block from search engines. Course, if you did not label or tag them or have a description, they would basically be unlikely to be found by any engines.

Code can be included in the HTML to ask Google and other search engines to avoid indexing that file. Google and other reputable search engines honor the request. This is independent of whether the file is publicly available.

However, any photo visible in a browser can be copied.

[35photo]

I post to my blog(www.35photo.blogspot.com), jpgmag.com(www.jpgmag.com/people/35photo[/url]), and my site which is updated less often then the other 2 sites..Anyone else on jpg?

Marko

[Al Kaplan]

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com is enough for me.

[Sonnar2]

What I like at flickr is the use of tags to find pictures taken with a certain lens, camera etc.
I.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/canon35mmf15ltm/

But not great enough for a professional account

[swoop]

I use DeviantArt. It's really simple. I thought about using MobileMe but I already have so much stuff on DA that t would just be silly to switch. I tried Flickr but I really don't like the layout of it.

[somecanuckchick]

Flickr, as well as my own web site. Really, it depends on the photo. :)

[johannielscom]

I voted for 'designed my own website'. Although it's currently still a work in progress, you can have a look at: www.portretteur.nl (http://www.portretteur.nl).

I plan to showcase my own shots (currently only two small sets under 'Fotografie' -> Spot Light / Spot Lit) as well as articles on gear I own and use or used to own and sold.

Like said, still a work in progress, so be gentle on me:o

[Mcary]

Been blogging off and on for a little less then a year now as I find the format easier to update then a regular website. Do a have domain but mostly just use it to upload proofs that I've upload from LR with models.

http://figuremodels.org/insomniacure/ not work safe

[Chris101]

I voted "blog such as wordpress", but I currently use Radio Userland for my blogging. Userland has stated that their support for Radio on weblogs.com will go away at the end of this year, meaning that my 7 year old blog (not just photos, science, politics, etc., but mostly just photos lately) will cease to exist at that time.

So I am looking into other means of keeping an online presence. I will still be able to use Radio, so no content will be lost, but I fear that without support (it is sure to go away as well) the software will become stale and break. I do have a WordPress blog (http://chris101.nikongear.com/), but but migrating my content from 101-365 will be non-trivial.

[Leigh Youdale]

I use MobileMe from my Mac through iPhoto but it's not open viewing for everyone.
I'm about to start using www.photoartgallery.com which offers private or public viewing and the opportunity to put images up for sale.

[kitaanat]

I use these :

RFF
Flickr
APUG
my own .com website (still develop and still don't have enough time to deal with my pictures)

I mainly use flickr to store my large pictures, RFF for my only RF pictures and APUG I've just uploaded some of my favorite pictures with water mark.

other place I'll link from flickr and use small thumbnail for faster load. Flickr have a good system to let me choose the permission to show / hide some pictures from publics and share them only for friends & family (which you can set that someone will be friends / family or other). I can turn on CC or copyright license as well which flickr have done this so far.

some place I know : photoshelter

[DRabbit]

Designed my own .com website... that's where I primarily put photos.
But I do post them on RFF, Facebook, and Flickr (occasionally). I've stuck a couple up on Panoramio recently to see if they'd get into GoogleMaps (mixed results).
I've been featured on LeicaShots and Steve Huff's site too :)

[Santtu Määttänen]

I have a combo of Photo.net (my more serious portfolio althou at this moment not perfect representation of my work, not even close), then I use flickr for temporary stuff online as well as Facebook. I publish photos on Facebook, Photo.net (obviously) and on various forums and few very precisely oriented blogs (like one for my companies this years largest project, check those pics out here (http://raakaidea.tumblr.com) ). Then again I write to plenty of places too. Being active on various things as well as fast moving and wanting to try out new things makes things hard to coordinate :)

[Roberto V.]

I started at DeviantArt, since I already had drawings and paintings there. Then I found flickr and that's where I upload now. I don't paint that much nowadays, although I wish I did.

[Cutly]

I created my own website : http://thomasboivin.com/index.html

[hendriphile]

flickr and my website :)

Speaking of Flickr... is anyone else having trouble transferring images from Flickr? It's changed... no more "image size" button, and when pasting the image URL into RFF, nothing comes up but a little white square with a red "X" in it.

P.S. After 2 days of frustration with the "new improved" Flickr, I switched to Photobucket and was uploading images in 1/2 an hour.

[totifoto]

I have had flick for a few years http://www.flickr.com/photos/totifoto/

and through Zenfolio I did my professional page last winter http://www.totifoto.com/

[semilog]

Indeed. And while it is considered poor grammar to start a sentence with a conjunction.... [ ;) ]
One should not start a sentence with a conjunction...

Actually, most authorities consider the initiation of a sentence with a conjunction to be neither incorrect nor in poor style.

Bryan Garner's summations (http://www.amazon.com/Garners-Modern-American-Usage-Garner/dp/0195382757/) are, at this point, definitive: "It is a rank superstition that this coordinating conjunction [and] cannot properly begin a sentence..." "It is a gross canard that beginning a sentence with but is stylistically slipshod... Good writers often begin sentences with but and have always done so." Garner then goes on to summarize the concurrence of several other authorities, and he provides numerous examples of these usages (and additional citations to such usages) by great and important writers from the 10th to the 21st century.

Garner even cites a 1963 study showing that about one in twelve sentences published by a selection of superb writers are initiated with coordinating conjunctions.

Also: I post my photos on SmugMug. They offer excellent service, are reasonably priced, and they're lovely people to deal with.

[sanmich]

Flickr for raw material.
weebly for a more organized site.

[silent1]

Does anybody use tumblr?
It is somehow more convenient than flickr in that you can easily customize the layout and have no limitations on the number of photos you can post.
However, it lacks groups and a decent feedback system, though you can still "like" or reply to photo posts.
I've got mine and I'm quite satisfied: http://blog.stefanomattia.it

[NickTrop]

Mostly Facebook. I also post (more so in the past) a lot on Deviantart.

[ramosa]

I use flickr. It works well with Lightroom.

[squinza]

Flickr: cheap and very effective!

[DNG]

Zenfolio for my family stuff that is office save
Pbase for galleries that contain adult rated stuff among other galleries.
Opera for storage of images I embed in forums like this.
RFF galleries for a limited stuff.

Edit
Picasa Web albums for my 1-Year-1-lens project... Yellow link below.

[DeanSilliman]

No Picasa love here at all? Or even mention? I have used MobileMe but am ready for a better solution. Flickr seems abusive to the user's sensibilities.

Dean

[peterm1]

I have been using Flickr as it works reasonably well as a means of getting feedback from a potentially large number of other people and is convenient.

There are aspects about it that I do not like however. The layout is very basic and there is no choice (as far as I am aware) about how your images are laid out and displayed. This is a problem. I would like to use a different template than the standard one.

Flickr also has some funny attitudes. Recently they changed their corporate look and feel and in doing so made a policy that the URL of users' images would be hidden and that you could only post links to the image at Flickr. This would force people on sites like this to come to Flickr to view images - no more embedded Flickr hosted images on forums like this one. Fortunately its not hard to get around this restriction presently if you know how and its still possible to directly post an image from Flickr to this and other forums.

But I dislike the presumption involved in this policy which benefits no one but Flicker (and does not really benefit them). I know that I for one would quit Flickr in an instant if they found a more effective way of blocking people from embedding Flickr images in other sites - this after all is one of my MAIN reasons for uploading to Flickr.

Ie I must get off my bum and start searching for potential new options. I would not be averse to setting up my own image site if I could find suitable templates and a host site that makes it easy to upload and manage them.

[wgerrard]

Flickr's single biggest advantage is that your photos will be exposed to more people there than anywhere else. A homebrew site, or a site on SmugMug or Zenfolio to which you've attached your own domain name, is almost certainly going to be invisible to everyone else unless someone sends them a link to click on.

[DanP]

Peter, I don't know if I understand you correctly. Pardon me if I am wrong, but if you are saying that you cannot embed an image from flickr into this forum..I think you might be wrong. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4908904493_8e220b0c57_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kromefoto/4908904493/)

Now only if I know how to embed an image from my RFF gallery into this thread...

[chrismoret]

What a great thread to promote my blog!!! ;-D

http://chrismoretphotosgrafix.blogspot.com.

Just a sucker for a pageload

[mooge]

Chris- nice photos but why are they so small? I think it would be nicer if they were bigger.

[David Murphy]

I started with Photobucket, but all the Flash gadgetry, ads, and general pizazz often makes my browser crash and just slows things down like hell - I almost can't stand it, so I started using Flickr. After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?! That's way too expensive in my view.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I started with Photobucket, but all the Flash gadgetry, ads, and general pizazz often makes my browser crash and just slows things down like hell - I almost can't stand it, so I started using Flickr. After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?! That's way too expensive in my view.

Too expensive? Seriously? I spent more than that yesterday to take my son out to dinner. Its practically free considering that its for a whole year. I pay $20 A MONTH for my web hosting, and its worth every single cent.

[David Murphy]

Chris, yes, but how many Web sites do you think there are out there that have fees and subscriptions? At $20-40 each to subscribe to this or that, it adds up real fast.

[tlitody]

Chris, yes, but how many Web sites do you think there are out there that have fees and subscriptions? At $20-40 each to subscribe to this or that, it adds up real fast.

And how many of them have you subscribed to?

The whole world have web sites and basic we hosting costs very very little, especially considering it is giving you world wide advertising coverage. $20 too expensive? I don't think so. Unfortunately the open source software community have developed a community of people who expect to get something for nothing. Everyone wants the Best for Free.

Just pay for your own web hosting and and put up one of the free gallery software packages. You will get more space than you ever need.

[David Murphy]

I've subscribed to a few in fact. Yes the Internet should be cheap if not free. We, the US tax payers already paid for it.

And how many of them have you subscribed to?

The whole world have web sites and basic we hosting costs very very little, especially considering it is giving you world wide advertising coverage. $20 too expensive? I don't think so. Unfortunately the open source software community have developed a community of people who expect to get something for nothing. Everyone wants the Best for Free.

Just pay for your own web hosting and and put up one of the free gallery software packages. You will get more space than you ever need.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I've subscribed to a few in fact. Yes the Internet should be cheap if not free. We, the US tax payers already paid for it.

No you haven't. Most of the internet was built and is owned by private companies. That's why you pay your local phone or cable company to connect you to the net in the form of DSL, cable internet, FiOS, or Dial-up. As for the content on the net, including services like Flickr, it costs the producers of that content money to write the software and support the millions of users on it as well as paying someone to host it. As a photographer you ought to know better than to demand that the creators of intellectual property should give it free.

As for whether its worth the $25 for Flickr Pro, you have to decide if photography is that important to you. For me its the second most important thing in my life (after my son) and well worth every penny of the $240 a year I pay for hosting my own website.

[Bob Michaels]

Just a personal opinion and yours may differ:

I believe there is a significant inverse correlation between the ease of posting images on line and the quality of images posted. Similar relationship with the cost.

Personally I almost never look at Flickr. It reminds me of what you get when things are free, quick, easy and require little thought.

If you don't like what I have on my website, understand that is the limit of my talent. It is not because I simply did not put enough time, thought and effort into posting them there.

[wgerrard]

After enjoying the relative simplicity of Flickr, they are now trying to force me to upgrade to a "Pro" account ($24.95 a year) since I've posted more than 200 photos. Is there a free alternative to this?!

Every Flickr competitor I'm aware of either limits free use or uses your photo pages as ad platforms. They have to make money somehow.

[David Murphy]

Where I live the Internet service providers are government sanctioned monopolies - they don't want either competition or reasonable prices (i.e. they don't want real capitalism - which I adore btw)!

No you haven't. Most of the internet was built and is owned by private companies. That's why you pay your local phone or cable company to connect you to the net in the form of DSL, cable internet, FiOS, or Dial-up. As for the content on the net, including services like Flickr, it costs the producers of that content money to write the software and support the millions of users on it as well as paying someone to host it. As a photographer you ought to know better than to demand that the creators of intellectual property should give it free.

As for whether its worth the $25 for Flickr Pro, you have to decide if photography is that important to you. For me its the second most important thing in my life (after my son) and well worth every penny of the $240 a year I pay for hosting my own website.

[David Murphy]

And by the way, the entire communications infrastructure in the USA was initially provided by a government sanctioned monopoly called AT&T - payed for by entrapped rate payers for about 100 years (who were told it was necessary and good for them). Many of you are too young to remember that. Maybe that's why I'm an Internet/telecom cynic - my trust level is low.

Anyway, Photobucket still seems to work and is free. I have dual core iMac coming in and perhaps it will run Flash (etc.) with enough speed to make it bearable.

[wgerrard]

Bob: I see Flickr as an "everyman's" photo gallery. I don't expect or want every photo to hold to some arbitrary quality standard.

David: I'm older than you are. I think it might be a stretch to argue that AT&T built the "entire communications infrastructure" of the U.S. And, whatever else, much of that infrastructure is pretty irrelevant to the modern internet.

Chris: I'm with you 100%, especially on the IP issues. But, most cable TV and internet companies do, in fact, have local monopolies in the U.S. I know you know that. I believe these monopolies should be compelled to allow others to, in effect, share the wire, or lose the monopoly.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Bob: I see Flickr as an "everyman's" photo gallery. I don't expect or want every photo to hold to some arbitrary quality standard.

David: I'm older than you are. I think it might be a stretch to argue that AT&T built the "entire communications infrastructure" of the U.S. And, whatever else, much of that infrastructure is pretty irrelevant to the modern internet.

Chris: I'm with you 100%, especially on the IP issues. But, most cable TV and internet companies do, in fact, have local monopolies in the U.S. I know you know that. I believe these monopolies should be compelled to allow others to, in effect, share the wire, or lose the monopoly.

My father is retired from Verizon, which is the landline phone company (not just cellphones) in much of Indiana. Verizon had to share its line with other companies that had no infrastructure or investment at all...so the monopoly is gone...deregulation of the phone industry forced that. There's a reason utilities have monopolies. To deliver their service, be it electricity, phone lines, gas lines, water lines, or cable TV, they have to run wires or pipes through people's property. A lot of landowners dislike the fact that government forces them to allow utilities to have a right of way on their land. Can you imagine how upset they'd be if there were 5 phone companies, 3 electric companies, 6 gas companies and 4 cable TV companies all wanting to bury lines or erect poles on their land?

Because internet and cable TV can both be delivered by phone companies, cable companies, and satellite providers these utilities have a lot more real competition than the electric, gas, and water utilities do.

[wgerrard]

A lot of landowners dislike the fact that government forces them to allow utilities to have a right of way on their land. Can you imagine how upset they'd be if there were 5 phone companies, 3 electric companies, 6 gas companies and 4 cable TV companies all wanting to bury lines or erect poles on their land?

Absolutely. That's one reason I want the people who own the lines to be compelled to allow other providers to use them to carry their signals and packets.

Because internet and cable TV can both be delivered by phone companies, cable companies, and satellite providers these utilities have a lot more real competition than the electric, gas, and water utilities do.

True, or at least the potential for competition is there. Don't know about Indiana, but around here Time Warner cable has competition for internet connectivity from AT&T (DSL), and a wireless provider. They don't serve great swaths of the population, though, so if you want broadband, you almost always buy it from Time Warner, which, in fact, is the only provider permitted to operate a cable franchise in the municipalities it serves here.

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Here in Ft. Wayne, which is a midsize city, you can get phone service from Verizon, Comcast, or one of several cellphone companies. You can get TV from Comcast, Verizon, Dish Network, and Direct TV. You can get internet from Verizon or Comcast. There's much less choice in small towns and even less in rural areas.

[Bob Michaels]

Absolutely. That's one reason I want the people who own the lines to be compelled to allow other providers to use them to carry their signals and packets. <snip>.

The FCC rules have permitted exactly what you want since 1985. You should familiarize yourself with the term CLEC or Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. It is a thriving industry providing much competition for the communications companies you think own the lines. FWIW, the vast part of our nationwide communications infrastructure is not owned by who I suspect you think owns it.

[wgerrard]

The FCC rules have permitted exactly what you want since 1985. You should familiarize yourself with the term CLEC or Competitive Local Exchange Carrier.

I'm aware of CLEC's. But, they aren't happening around here.

FWIW, the vast part of our nationwide communications infrastructure is not owned by who I suspect you think owns it.

And who do you suspect I think owns it? :)

I think communications is one of those industries that better meets consumer demands if it is a monopoly or is dominated by a small cartel. That also means government needs to regulate it and watch it like a hawk because it won't be susceptible to the usual constraints of the market.

But, providing content on the net is more publishing than communications. I want to keep that as open as possible. In my town, that means compelling Time Warner to allow other content providers and ISP's to push packets on TW's infrastructure.

[Bob Michaels]

I'm aware of CLEC's. But, they aren't happening around here.



And who do you suspect I think owns it? :)

I think communications is one of those industries that better meets consumer demands if it is a monopoly or is dominated by a small cartel. That also means government needs to regulate it and watch it like a hawk because it won't be susceptible to the usual constraints of the market.

But, providing content on the net is more publishing than communications. I want to keep that as open as possible. In my town, that means compelling Time Warner to allow other content providers and ISP's to push packets on TW's infrastructure.

Bill I am surprised that you do not have CLEC's competing in your area. We have some 5-8 here in central FL competing. Don't know where you live though. If you line costs are in the $300 per month range (i.e. not residential) they are aggressive.

Also in FL any company can lay TV / internet cable on any right of way and compete with the incumbent. If Cox wanted to lay a competitive cable to my house and compete with TWC/Brighthouse, they could do so. Currently I can choose to get my TV as well as internet service from the "phone company" Century Link (formerly Embarq, formerly Sprint) as well as TWC/Brighthouse. Of couse, I can also get my local phone service from TWC/Brighthouse as well as Century Link. So everyone has some form of competitor for all communications service.

For long distance transmission, everything has merged with packets of data, both voice and internet, being carried simultaneously over all the network. And the long distance network or cloud is a separate business from local service. Many companies own pieces of the network. And the entire network carries packets for all the local service companies. Your AT&T long distance call may be routed over fiber owned by TWC and your TV signal may be routed over fiber owned by Verizon. There is no telling how many companies will handle upload of this message or your reading it.

Apologies to the OP for sidetracking the question of where you do post your photos on line.

[hellomikmik]

i was ok with flickr until i wanted to upgrade my account, no way to do it without credit card, they say you can do it with paypal account but you can't. looks like flickr + paypal desperately want to know how much money i have in bank (not much :))

anyway, i believe only in prints

[wlewisiii]

I used Flickr for awhile but loathed it. A poke in the eye with a sharp stick would be better than Flickr

I currently use Picassaweb http://picasaweb.google.com/wlewisiii

I have considered Smugmug but can't afford it.

William

[darkkavenger]

Hi,

I use flickr as the main place to publish photos, however the shots I consider as worthy end up on my new own website (link in signature) as I've been asked several times if I sell prints. I used to host on deviantart but I left for an array of reasons (loss of interest, slowness, growing up etc..).

Flickr suits me pretty well for day to day use, it's plain and simple and has the tools one needs, and since I'm neither Koudelka nor Capa Flickr is just perfect to quickly send, tag and publish!

Edit: Picasa too, for privatefamily shots.

[Renzsu]

Flickr as a somewhat selective imagedump and a portfolio site hosted by Cargo Collective (very easy to setup, slick minimal skins/themes, integrated CMS, 6Gb hosting space).

[darkkavenger]

Flickr as a somewhat selective imagedump and a portfolio site hosted by Cargo Collective (very easy to setup, slick minimal skins/themes, integrated CMS, 6Gb hosting space).

You've got some pretty stunning photos, the portraits are amazing, and I love the expression of that lady in NYC metro :-)

[Arvay]

mainly at photo.net
it's cheaper than flickr and it is NOT a reincarnation of facebook
flickr to do something quick, free acc.

[steveyork]

Flickr is very easy to use. The posts of B&W tend to be a tad dark though.

[taskoni]

I voted RFF. I only want to share with you guys!

Same here!

Regards,
b.

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Ease of use and fastness brought me to flickr (started years ago with but left pbase - not easy, not fast). pity but in this respect flickr also works for me better than rff

[Shane]

I have both a flickr account and my own website. I also post to forums sometimes.

[OurManInTangier]

I have a website for my work, though this is due a redesign and a complete update of images. For my personal photos RFF was the only gallery I used up until a week or so ago. I found Zenfolio and have been using their 14 day free trial, I'm really very impressed with what you can get for your budget and intend to keep it once the trial is up.

I found that I was putting personal images onto my commercial site and blurring the distinction of the sites original purpose. Now I can have a dedicated site for my personal pictures that appears very similar to my own website but have a delineation between the two.

I am on Flickr too but mostly just so I can view, and easily find again, the work of some of my favourite photographers. I've always found Flickr too orientated, or perhaps I should say some of the people there, around the 'collecting' of comments and badges than the presentation of the images. Just a personal feeling but enough to put me off plunging in fully.

[jon.oman]

I'm on SmugMug, but I also have my own site that I wrote. You can see the link below.

[Ronny]

Paris People France
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronnypersson/

[dct]

PBase, as you see in my signature.
Like: There is out-of-the-box no flickering flash stuff nore other intrusive things. I don't need big world attention at my pictures. I use it mostly for linking.
Dislike: no blog.I was wrong.
Edit: There is a bit strange blog posting function.

[jagwar.jim]

My own website.

[jwicaksana]

flickr for me.
I'm surprised no 500px on the poll options?

[stitchohana]

Flickr for me. :)

[Bill58]

I don't "publish" on flickr, I post on there and am reasonably happy. I especially luv the new flickr uploader which is so fast. If I was more of a techie, I'd learn how to put my photos in groups.

[Bill Clark]

With the exception of a head shot of myself, I don't put photos anywhere on the internet.

That has been my policy for my business and family.

People who I photograph can do what they want to do.

[Aristophanes]

Phanfare is the service I use.

[taemo]

Flickr, as it's great for hosting and sharing my pics to my blogsite and other forums.
also have a 500px account that I use as my portfolio site

[KM-25]

So no option for I don't publish online?

[Addy101]

SmugMug, not cheap but good (and I don't understand Flickr.......)

[DSkjaeve]

I have a website that I try to update every six months or so. Also a facebook page and a flickr account.

[Tijmendal]

Flickr as my 'main' sharing site.
I also have a visual blog where I upload all my content I upload to flickr.; then I'm also making a portfolio site.
Lastly, I have a Facebook page.

The thing with having your own site, is that people don't look back at it more than once. The great thing with flickr and FB is that people can subscribe to your content.