Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 11 of total 11 in this topic |
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Jan 27, 2008 - 09:20am PT
|
I use Photobucket for just about all my ST traffic, and not much else. Got a note this weekend saying my 25gb/month bandwidth allocation was almost used up.
I wasn't aware that I had a bandwidth limit, but found out that if you click on "account options" you get a "dashboard" screen with all the statistics. Sure enough, I was at 23.5gb already this month.
You can have unlimited bandwidth if you pay Photobucket $25/year, which seems like a fair deal.
My question is, have others out there run into this ceiling? It's the first time for me, and I'm curious why the hits on my photos should be going so much faster this month than ever before. Is it all Supertopo action (which has seemed pretty quiet) or are links getting passed along somewhere? What's up?
|
|
cintune
climber
Penn's Woods
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 10:06am PT
|
That is how it works.
|
|
Crimpergirl
Social climber
St. Looney
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 10:31am PT
|
Got a similar message a while back. I'd posted a lot that month. I stopped posting photos for a few days and have never had a problem since.
Wow Happie! You have tons of hits. Here are my 'stats':
Account Dashboard
Total Pictures and Videos: 440
Monthly Hits: 100
Album Size:
58 MB (5%)
1 GB
Monthly Bandwidth:
13 MB (0%)
25 GB
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 11:53am PT
|
I use my Comcast account to stash photos... don't actually know how much they get looked at so I may not have a bandwidth limit issue anyway. The Comcast web accounts are now 1 GB, which translates into something like 10,000 images of roughly 467x700 pixel jpeg color images... enough not to be an issue for my usage.
For some reason I feel better putting my images in "my own" area (really Comcast's though) than in some online repository... don't know why, really, since once the images are on the web they take on a life of their own.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 27, 2008 - 12:13pm PT
|
I figured that most of the traffic was from other folks viewing ST threads -- I haven't been all that active here lately myself, certainly less so than in the past. So it seemed like something else besides me must be driving this train. Right now Photobucket sez I've had more than 150,000 hits and almost 30gb of bandwidth *this month*. Those numbers caught my attention, just wondered what others were seeing. Happie's numbers are in the same ballpark given that I post more photos than she does. Tarbuster, Museum and some others post a lot of them, though.
once the images are on the web they take on a life of their own.
Ain't it the truth. Occasionally I see one of my photos posted by someone else, from their own photo-hosting account.
|
|
carrbro
climber
Rockies
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 12:40pm PT
|
Maybe it deserves a seperate thread, but what is the consensus on the best photo-hosting site of the many out there (photobucket, smugmug, flicker, just to name a few). Ease of posting, basic editing tools, cost/free memory, etc.
|
|
TrundleBum
Trad climber
Las Vegas
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 01:29pm PT
|
Well whatever you use for a host...
Make sure to optimize your images.
A computer screen actually tops out at pretty low quality.
No sense uploading high def' pic's that are 2000 pixels wide.
No one will appreciate the quality.
Reduce (and standardize) format size and reduce the quality at save (Photoshop maybe #5 or 6).
|
|
happiegrrrl
Trad climber
New York, NY
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 01:41pm PT
|
I find Photobucket to be slow. Have been wondering about other services myself, because I am thinking of making a more "pretty" album that I can send others to for online viewing.
Right now my P/Bucket albums are a big gloppy mess, with everything all over the place. I can't clean it up because the links will break, so want to keep the P/bucket account for my toss em up pics(like joke pictures or whatever) and have a better account for a more formal look.
So, definitely interested in hearing what others think of the various (FREE)sites. I am not willing to pay; there are some many online things that want a few dollars here and there, automatically deducted in perpetuity, and it all adds up if one isn't careful.
PLUS - Why should we pay for an account based on hits, if we cannot protect those photos from being copied and linked to other places? Clearly, some of Chiloe's photos must have been absconded with, because if it was just on STopo, others who posted in the same thread as he did would also have high rates of hits.
It's true that people will take a photo and post it without crediting. I came across one of CCragsman's photos a while back on someone's rc.com profile, with no indication that the person was not the copyright holder.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 01:51pm PT
|
Hey - what's the big deal?
Just upload your pics at 250 to 500 KB each and call it a day.
Isn't that how most people do it around here??
And besides, everyone has high-speed these days...
Optimizing images for the web is such a hassle!
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2008 - 01:58pm PT
|
My photobucket account says:
Total Pictures and Videos: 217
Monthly Hits: 3230
Album Size: 26 MB (2%)
Monthly Bandwidth: 219 MB (0%)
Apparently I should be posting more, or at least more interesting, photos. That, or posting them to the long threads, so that people see them even if they're totally out of place.
Maybe I'll start posting photos of Loki to every thread. That would work, wouldn't it? I mean, not the same photo each time - there'd be some variety. And who wouldn't want to look at a cute cat picture, in the middle of some dreary name-calling political thread?
|
|
| Messages 1 - 11 of total 11 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Total Pictures and Videos: 890
Let us know!