Quote:
Originally Posted by CityBoyDoug
10 years ago I was told that Photobucket was one of best hosting sites. Its purpose was to host photos so that you could post them to forums, websites etc.
It was free also but for a limited number of photos. That's understandable. I went for it like millions of other people. Today it seems like that was a slow motion lie. Now its turned out that they are one of the worst and most ruthless. They let us post for many years and then punk millions of their Free accounts with a huge and eternal bill. [In four years the hosting of my photos would cost me $1200.]
Are any of the photo hosting sites ethical ?
|
Although Google has finished turning Picasa Web Albums into Google Photos and the wonderful old interface is now gone, all of my photos remain in the new interface and should still be live in this thread. I did a quick search and loaded up a random post of mine from 5 years ago - the photo remains, and when viewing just the image by itself it can be resized by changing the URL in the same way as it used to be. I'm not sure if the embedding functionality will continue but Google seems to be intent on keeping the former Picasa Web Albums photos in an archive indefinitely. My photos posted to the thread in the past seem safe for now.
The Google Photos interface is dumbed-down and less versatile, and although it appears to support a kludge-y method of embedding photos involving copying image locations with really long URLs, judging by Google support forum posts, this method only works temporarily and the embedded photos will soon disappear.
I am going to leave the test post below, with the method I determined for embedding photos I had already uploaded to Picasa Web Albums, and I will check back to see if they persist.
Here is a photo of the Los Angeles Theatre downtown, from the 2016 Night on Broadway event. I have linked it two different ways to see what happens in a forum thread. This first way is using the 'Share' button in the Google Photos interface and then using 'Get Link' to create a link, and embedding that directly below this line, followed by a separate URL link:
This link goes to the photo, but contained within a Google Photos interface. Which is why the same link placed above it in IMG tags does not work to display the photo in-thread.
Clearly this method is useless for placing photos in-thread. But it works ok to link images.
The second method is to right-click on the image I'm viewing in Google Photos and select 'Copy image location' from my browser's context menu, and embedding that with IMG tags, which I have done immediately below, followed once again by a URL link:
Here is a link straight to the photo, just quote my post to see the super-long URL!
This is an extremely long link but it seems to work. Let me know if you do not see a total of 3 visible images over the course of this post.
Judging by Google support posts, it may not work in some forums without adding .jpg or ?.jpg to the end. It also has size info at the end of the URL (in the image above, that portion is "w1309-h871-no"). I can change this, just like I used to be able to change the Picasa URLs. I am not sure what the "-no" represents, but the 'w' and 'h' specify width and height. Back in the Picasa days the same thing was done with /s1000/ in the URL to specify 1000 pixel width, or s1200, s800, etc. for whatever size you want. This new usage works the same way. I can change that portion to "w1000" and delete the remainder "-h871-no", and I will get an image 1000 pixels wide:
Or I can delete the 'w' figure and change the 'h' figure to h200 and get an image 200 pixels high:
I can't change the w and h independently to stretch an image - if you change both it just seems to use the one that results in the smallest image.
So, I will have to check back to this post in the future and see if these images persist, or if they eventually disappear as seems to be the case for people who posted in Google's product forums about it last fall. If something is different for you, the viewer, based on your feedback I will try to edit the post to reflect the new information.
I will also need to experiment for future images that I will upload directly using Google Photos, as the desktop Picasa app no longer seems to work to upload to new folders in batches. I will need to experiment some more but I didn't want to put any more in one post.
Picasa was so much easier and Google's decision to dump it without an adequate replacement was a stupid, stupid move that feels like going backwards.