This Page

has been moved to new address

Keeping up with photos and videos

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Wide White: Keeping up with photos and videos

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Keeping up with photos and videos

I talked about a few social media platforms yesterday but I didn't touch on platforms for videos and photos. They're a little different from the 6 platforms I covered yesterday and I'm not a power user of the video and photo sites.

Here are the 4 platforms I've used for photos and videos and my brief thoughts on them.

Again, I'm not an avid user of any of these platforms so any additional feedback is welcome.

Launched: 2005
I joined: 2010
Users: 43+ million
PROS: Easy video upload and sharing; best mobile video apps.
CONS: Copyright issues prevent most attempted uploads containing music; restriction on length of videos uploaded.
Summary: YouTube is the premier platform for sharing videos. It's used by more people than any other. It's simple. But if you've ever created a video with some sort of musical background, don't even think of trying to share it with friends on YouTube. I love YouTube as a user, but the only videos I upload there are simple unedited clips.

Launched: 2006
I joined: 2009
Users: unknown
PROS: Easy video upload and sharing; no restrictions on length or music used in a video.
CONS: No major mobile apps; low usage; poor business direction (went through bankruptcy and sale earlier this year); virtually no access outside of U.S.; viewing a video on their site (as opposed to embedded on another site) reveals a messy page cluttered with ads and other videos.
Summary: I turned to Veoh after frustrations trying to upload a video slideshow I put together that was 23 minutes long and used a number of music clips. The combination of length and music rendered YouTube and Vimeo unusable. Veoh did exactly what I needed it to do. The site itself isn't pretty to look at, but it gets the job done.

Launched: 2004
I joined: 2010
Users: 40+ million
PROS: Top photo-sharing site; simple to upload, share, and follow others' photos; more robust than Facebook for photo sharing.
CONS: Limits on monthly uploads may pose a problem for power users.
Summary: I really haven't used Flickr yet, so I don't have much to say from personal experience. I still haven't uploaded a single photo. However, I've used it as a viewer and have been impressed. I'm trying to decide between Picasa and Flickr, so if anyone has input as a user of either platform, let me know.

Launched: 2004
I joined: 2010
Users: unknown
PROS: Google integration, including with Picasa desktop; unlimited monthly uploads; simple user interface.
CONS: Not as expansive a user base as Flickr.
Summary: I've used Picasa a little and it's been a simple platform to work with. Picasa's desktop version is actually pretty cool, with face recognition so you can find all photos with a given friend or family members grouped together in one album. Of course, the face recognition isn't perfect and takes a bit of time as you identify all of the faces in your photos, but for the most part, it works pretty well. Given Flickr's dominance in this arena I'm guessing it beats Picasa for features but I'd love to get feedback from those who've used either one on why they prefer one over the other.



Anonymous Bill Roehl declared,

The Flickr limitations on uploading are only for those who aren't paying. There are no limits on number of uploads, space taken, etc.

It's a bit pricey at $24.95/year but I upload my images at full size and store them there permanently. I don't have to worry about storage space on my machine at home and I know they are backed up somewhere else.

Problems with Flickr are organization. You can't do it offline and their online tools suck. Really suck--especially when you have tens of thousands of photos.

If you go to Flickr I suggest having an organization plan from the get-go and keep up with it or you'll be sorry.

10/12/2010 8:39 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home