Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Image Galleries
buzzed, B&W
Man, now that I have a digital camera, sharing photos is something I want to do. Currently, I'm using Flickr, which is pretty cool, in that you can tag your photos by categories, such as my pictures of sledding, but you can also browse other keywords, so I can see everyone's pictures on sledding (that they haven't marked as private). You can browse lots of pictures by tags. Lots of Burning Man pictures . . . Posters can also annotate their images, and browsers can comment on images. Overall a pretty cool service - the ability to tag, annotate, and share your pictures is nice, but the sense of community that is built by having the tags shared between albums is what really makes Flickr cool.

As a free user, I can upload 10 megs a month, and am limited to three sets. 10 megs seems to be plenty so far, but three sets is bad. Here are my three. One might argue that sets defeats the purpose of the tagging, as tagging makes it easy for someone to search, and eliminates the needs for sets. I would argue that sets are what makes it easiest to share new photos as "albums." I also hear that Flicrk is cool since it has a strong API, which makes it easy for programmers to write tools that integrate with it.

Anyway, the three set limitation is bugging me, so I've been exploring options. Gallery looks pretty slick, and I think I could throw it on my home server, but I don't think it has the tags, nor does it have the community that Flickr does - on the other hand, I'd have unlimited albums, nested albums, and movie support. I'll mess with it when I get a chance - I've noticed I spend a lot less time messing around with computers these days, which has pros and cons . . .


Log in

No account? Create an account