NJRC Response to Photobucket's change

[njtiger24 aquariums]

Hello fellow reefers. As some of you are well aware of Photobucket has changed their policy on 3rd party hosting. Due to this policy change many users, some being our own members, images are 'broken' on sites beside Photobucket. We would like to try and help out our members who want to host photos on other sites. Photobucket is charging about $400 a year for 3rd party hosting. We are thinking that we will offer unlimited hosting for our NJRC members, $12 a year, and limited hosting for non-paid members. With this said we want to put a disclaimer out there. If this 3rd party hosting drives our site beyond our current web hosting ability we will need to look into different options but we will try and provide ample notifications of any changes.

Different options:

• Non-Paid members
  • Maximum Albums - 5
  • Maximum Photos per album - 10
  • Maximum videos per album - 5
• NJRC Members (paid)
  • Maximum Albums - unlimited
  • Maximum Photos per album - unlimited
  • Maximum videos per album - unlimited

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

@redfishbluefish and others Photobucket users hopefully this will help you guys out.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

To host images on 3rd party sites the images will need to be placed into the Gallery Section of our website.

 

[redfishbluefish]

With our old website, we had no option of posting pictures directly.....you had to use a service like Photobucket.

With this new website, we can post pictures directly by using "upload a file." Is this the same as what you're now proposing?

I'm also curious what Reef2Reef does.....my pictures there were loaded from Photobucket, but they then somehow suck them over to R2R. All my pictures over there are still there.

I'm bothered by some of my posts, like my Tale of the Tank, that's now trash without the pictures.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

With our old website, we had no option of posting pictures directly.....you had to use a service like Photobucket.

With this new website, we can post pictures directly by using "upload a file." Is this the same as what you're now proposing?

I'm also curious what Reef2Reef does.....my pictures there were loaded from Photobucket, but they then somehow suck them over to R2R. All my pictures over there are still there.

I'm bothered by some of my posts, like my Tale of the Tank, that's now trash without the pictures.

Paul no 3rd party hosting is different than just uploading a picture to a thread. I will do some more testing but it should work this way. If you create an album(s) in the Gallery section on our website you can then link those pictures to threads here as well as other websites. Unfortunately I do not know what R2R did (unless they cache the images) but let me see if I can figure a way to solve the Tale of the Tank issue.

 

[kschweer]

Basically what is being proposed here is that our sites gallery can be used similar to how photobucket used to work. Basically you can use our site for 3rd party hosting. As for R2R they pay (a good amount from my understanding) to have all images loaded to the forum cached, this is why most images over there still work.

 

[redfishbluefish]

I'm curious why we would want to host pictures here when we can now load them directly. I see the potential of this being abused, loading, as an example, pictures posted on eBay. Why would we want to do that.

James, thanks for the offer for attempting to fix my Tale, but it isn't necessary......I have probably 2 to 3 thousand pictures posted on our site.

 

[kschweer]

The idea is to use this for a perk for members since many have and are effected by the photobucket changes. Images can be hosted to use on other forums or to have here instead of taking up room on a phone or something.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

I'm curious why we would want to host pictures here when we can now load them directly. I see the potential of this being abused, loading, as an example, pictures posted on eBay. Why would we want to do that.

James, thanks for the offer for attempting to fix my Tale, but it isn't necessary......I have probably 2 to 3 thousand pictures posted on our site.

Paul it was not just for posting pictures to our site but also allow members to post to other sites (like R2R, RC, ebay, etc...) like they did with Photobucket. If it gets abused we can always look into changing settings or do away with it.

 

[Mikeamadio]

Wouldn't you want to charge more for membership fee if people want to use photobucket to offset new purchases. I upload all my images from my phones sd card or camera gallery, and from what I understand you can download pb images to phone then upload as a non 3rd party.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

Wouldn't you want to charge more for membership fee if people want to use photobucket to offset new purchases. I upload all my images from my phones sd card or camera gallery, and from what I understand you can download pb images to phone then upload as a non 3rd party.

disclaimer out there. If this 3rd party hosting drives our site beyond our current web hosting ability we will need to look into different options but we will try and provide ample notifications of any changes.

That is why I added the disclaimer.

This isn't to replace photobucket or other sites where users dump their phone pictures. This is to help members who might want to upload to one location and share to different sites.

 

[redfishbluefish]

I just don't see the need with us now having the ability to post pictures directly. But then again, I'm not tech savvy.

As far as storing pictures, get Google Photos....it's free and they are stored in the cloud. Neat features as well, like facial recognition. They also send movies and albums to you that are pretty neat. Can't say enough about them.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

I can tell you as an IT person.

Do not dump your phone or computer pictures to any online site (even our website). There many issues with doing something like this (for you guys and for the site hosting)

Issues for hosting sites - storage, management, etc..
User issue - site goes down photos are gone, privacy of the images are no longer protected (for example if you upload a picture to our site its now public domain), etc..

If you want to save them in any place I would suggest Google Photos because Google isn't going anywhere anytime soon and they have the money to fight the Government on privacy.

 

[Mikeamadio]

Not tech savvy either, I just don't see the reason for a $400 expense when there's other ways around it that are already there.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

I just don't see the need with us now having the ability to post pictures directly. But then again, I'm not tech savvy.

As far as storing pictures, get Google Photos....it's free and they are stored in the cloud. Neat features as well, like facial recognition. They also send movies and albums to you that are pretty neat. Can't say enough about them.

Paul again its not something folks need to use. Its an option for them to use. A good example (but again there other ways to achive this same thing) is I could create an album for my controller I am building. I can then share those images to other reef sites without the need to upload them again; but uploading them doesn't take any extra affect for me. This provides a central location to manage those images.

Again its not something our users have to use. Just something we felt would be a benefit to our members

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

Not tech savvy either, I just don't see the reason for a $400 expense when there's other ways around it that are already there.

@Mikeamadio I hope you know that Photobucket is charging ~$400 a year not us. I and many other people agree there no need to pay $400 for that option when there tons of other options out there

 

[Mikeamadio]

Yes I understand it's photobucket and not NJRC. I think that the $400 purchase isn't worth it to revive old pictures, when we could do something a lot more worthwile like donate to coral research.

 

[Mikeamadio]

I'm also only a member so I do not mean to cross any boundaries. Just giving my voice as a member.

 

[njtiger24 aquariums]

Yes I understand it's photobucket and not NJRC. I think that the $400 purchase isn't worth it to revive old pictures, when we could do something a lot more worthwile like donate to coral research.

Agree $400 can be used for better more important things. The club isn't paying $400 for this. I used that number in comparison to our NJRC fee of $12 a year lol.

I'm also only a member so I do not mean to cross any boundaries. Just giving my voice as a member.

. You are not crossing any boundaries. This club is for it's members and the members always have a voice. I am listening to everything that is being said and taking it all in to try and have the best solution for the club. Don't take my replies as dismissal of you or anything just trying to point things of my thinking

 

[Mikeamadio]

Well said and understood.