Flickr purists gripe about video expansion

Members of the No Video on Flickr group have posted hundreds of images protesting the photo-sharing site's inclusion of video.

(Credit: Flickr)

Shortly after Flickr added videos to its photo-sharing site, a number of users are up in arms.

The No Video on Flickr group amassed more than 4,000 members just a few hours after the new feature launched.

"I love Flickr, and I think it should stay the same way it has always been," the group description said. "We don't need another YouTube! I have nothing against YouTube, I just don't want to see all the $*#% that's on there to wind up on here!"

Personally, I find the concerns overblown, though it might have been judicious of Flickr to add an opt-out option for those who don't want video. A lot of people react unfavorably to change--think film buffs who don't care for digital cameras, for one example.

And I suspect video is likely to dilute the great photography that's available on Flickr much less than the vast oceans of mediocre snapshots on the site. The days of Flickr being a haven solely for refined, high-grade photography are long gone if indeed they ever existed. Also, who knows? Maybe the addition of video will help improve Flickr's business so it can be overhauled with a better user interface.

Flickr member Haeretik posted a petition, so far signed by hundreds of members, that states, "We all joined Flickr because of its dedication to photography and photographers, and we want Flickr to remain true to this dedication. It is our request that this feature and addition to Flickr be removed."

Some discussion on the gripe group has been constructive. For those who don't want videos to play, there is a Flickr configuration setting that lets users reverse the default behavior that the video will play automatically when its page is opened, and Firefox users can add extensions that block Flash videos.

(Via Thomas Hawk)

[dogboi]

Wah Wah Wah

Okay, I was real supportive of the whole "Microsoft keep your hands off our Flickr" movement, but this is just dumb. A company adds to your service, and you complain about it? If you don't want video on flickr, don't use the video and don't watch any of the videos. How hard is that? Flickr people have gotten out of hand. Yes, it's a community site, and the community should have some say, but the people who actually run the company get the final say. If you don't like it, stop your whining and go elsewhere.

[78cherche]

Not true, without the PAYING community there is no company

Think about it - just don't watch the video? C'mon it's about general deterioration of services because of this "video" uploading hogging all the resources!

It's not that the videos are going to dilute the "art", although for some it may be - it is a matter of greatly noticeably deterioration of resources.

I takes me more than 3 times to view what I want, and all the flickr resources (human and otherwise) could have been spent improving existing services.

If they come up with separate hosting/bandwidth I wouldn't give a flying f, I paid for a service, and if I am not getting what I am used to because of some ill-though-out move, I am not going to renew my pro account.

[hunter_jc]

Video open new ways to express art and creativity.

I can imagine all those beautiful artsy video.

[78cherche]

I agree, but not using flickr resources like

bandwidth and servers and technicians and the like.

[djacobow1]

I'm old! Stop changing things!

Seriously, video *is* different from photography -- not "better," just "different." Because these sorts of sites are as much about community as anything else, it stands to reason that changing the media mix is going to change the people mix, and for those who liked the old people, that's a bummer. The effect if even greater if one smallish "specialty group" (photo enthusiasts) is about to be overrun but a potentially much larger group (people who post videos). Telling people they have no reason to dislike the change is actually a little condescending.

That said, I wasn't a flickr user, but it is one of the only relatively mainstream photo sites that my employer's overzealous IT department does not block. That will change, I suspect, the day the first must-see video clip is posted to it and 30% of my coworkers click to watch it once. :)

[Dan Krecklow]

Flickr Video

There are 2 perceptions here:

1)Flickr is an artistic photography site; Some argue that it's a photo sharing sight. If it is, why the artistic and competitive nature of the Explore feature? If it's just democratic photo sharing why don't they pick Explore photos randomly?

2) Whether or not it's true, there is some perception that Flickr has had issues maintaining quality service. I think some are concerned that quality of service and upload times will degrade.

That's how I see it. I'm probably mistaken. Just another know it all Yank.

Dan Krecklow

[Shoogle2]

Flickr's big new thing is...video??

It's always fun to see the Flickr crowd get stirred up like someone kicked their anthill. SmugMug (which I prefer) has had video capability for quite some time, though they don't shove the feature in your face. It's really nothing to freak out about, honestly.

I do think their 90-second limit is interesting, as it ensures some brevity and focus (well, hopefully). Actually I think 60 seconds would be enough for "slices of life." :)