Comments on Colors...Pretty: Flickr's Dirty Little Secret

Haha. That did sound like me, didn't it?

2007-02-02T11:39:00.000-06:00

Haha. That did sound like me, didn't it?

@anonymousIt's chili. Not soup. It's freakin AWESO...

2007-02-01T15:04:00.000-06:00

@anonymous

It's chili. Not soup. It's freakin AWESOME chile that I created. It's my italian chicken chili. People shouldn't just be taking photos of it they should be writing sonnets about it and naming their children after it. Yes, it's that freakin life changing. I think it even cures the common cold.

The recipe is here.
http://flickr.com/photos/kerfuffle/357285855/

P.S. You wouldn't happen to be CEO or an employee of a photo hosting site called Zoto, would you?

@mrothThat's hilarious.

2007-02-01T14:52:00.000-06:00

@mroth

That's hilarious.

Ok, you figured us out! I work for Flickr. I've...

2007-02-01T14:42:00.000-06:00

Ok, you figured us out! I work for Flickr. I've revealed the dark truth behind this on my blog at:
http://mroth.info/blog/2007/02/01/flickrs-dirty-secret-revealed/

maybe only 'pro's' would care but that begs the qu...

2007-02-01T11:07:00.000-06:00

maybe only 'pro's' would care but that begs the question- If you're a pro, why the hell are you hosting on a gimicky social networking site like flickr. If you're a real pro, host your own.

What the hell.Why are you photographing a bowl of ...

2007-02-01T10:30:00.000-06:00

What the hell.

Why are you photographing a bowl of soup.

The problem is your subject.

Flickr should have an AI filter for idiots who want to post images of soup.

Only artful nudes and cool scenery is interesting. Soup is not a subject matter for photography.

Someone should take away your camera, soup photographer.

Different programs resize images with differing qu...

2007-02-01T09:25:00.000-06:00

Different programs resize images with differing quality. This is nothing new. All this tells me is that Flickr is better (or different) at resizing than Zoto is. Use Photoshop to resize an image and then use IrfanView to resize the same picture, and they will also look different. Neither program is doing any secret editing to your picture.

Or perhaps Flickr is just suing a more effective t...

2007-02-01T08:58:00.000-06:00

Or perhaps Flickr is just suing a more effective thumbnail algorithm to render the picture. No consipiracy here.

Yes, i agree and i've actually noticed how much mo...

2007-02-01T06:56:00.000-06:00

Yes, i agree and i've actually noticed how much more enhanced their images are, its a great way to enlighten your stack i guess.

Well, how does it matter? Even if you were a pro, ...

2007-02-01T06:29:00.000-06:00

Well, how does it matter? Even if you were a pro, you couldnt sell your photos on flickr. You would still need to host your photos on another site that lets your customers buy the photos and licenses

If Flickr does apply filters and the photo looks better, there's nothing wrong with it.

I would have thought doing this to thumbnails is a...

2007-02-01T04:09:00.000-06:00

I would have thought doing this to thumbnails is a no-brainer. You're already modifying the size. Why not modify other things? Some places crop thumbnails even. They just *represent* the photo. The difficult question is whether to do this to larger versions of the photo. (Does flickr?)

Excellent POST! I've probably read 100's of blog ...

2007-02-01T02:36:00.000-06:00

Excellent POST! I've probably read 100's of blog entries on flickr and photo sharing services, but this is the first one I know of to reveal this "secret." Occasionally, blur used correct can greatly enhance the effect of photo, so I agree with you that user option is the best choice. Wouldn't it be terrible for a pro photographer to upload a photo that used blur artistically to have their "improvement" filters mess it up.

Flickr only tweaks the thumbnails, NOT the origina...

2007-02-01T01:48:00.000-06:00

Flickr only tweaks the thumbnails, NOT the originals. (I tested this several times) And thumbnails usually need a little sharpening, so I don't mind a bit. I don't base my opinion of a photo on how the thumbnail looks, only the full-size original. Do you?

it seems like what would be best is just to have a...

2007-01-31T21:56:00.000-06:00

it seems like what would be best is just to have an option available to the pro photographers to turn off the filtering, but leave it on by default.

Wow. That's earth-shattering. I think we should ...

2007-01-31T21:29:00.000-06:00

Wow. That's earth-shattering. I think we should look into a special congressional investigative committee. Wow. I’m just stunned on so many levels.

If flickr doesn't mess with th full size image, ju...

2007-01-31T20:19:00.000-06:00

If flickr doesn't mess with th full size image, just th thumbnails, then that's ok. Images always become more blurry when made smaller, and a little sharpening of th thumbnails makes them easier to make out.

I hadn't noticed. Are you saying that they're shar...

2007-01-31T20:14:00.000-06:00

I hadn't noticed.

Are you saying that they're sharpening the uploaded jpg or just the auto-sized thumbnails?

If the smaller size is being sharpened, I'd think that would be more authentic to the original.

I'd consider modification of thumbnails to be ok, ...

2007-01-31T19:42:00.000-06:00

I'd consider modification of thumbnails to be ok, since it improves the look of the photos at reduced sizes. Did you check to see if the full-size image was put through the same filtering? That would be unacceptable, in my view.

Hmm ... of course, there is no human involved in t...

2007-01-31T19:09:00.000-06:00

Hmm ... of course, there is no human involved in the flickr process, so if you intended you photograph to be a little blurry, you're screwed. And sometimes, I do play with the focus on my photographs, experimenting, just to see how things will turn out. I suppose you're right though. For the general photographer, Flickr is OK. If you're a pro, the only reason you'd go to Flickr is the exposure, otherwise, you'd host your photos somewhere else ... like your own site.

The reason for sharping is when you resize an imag...

2007-01-31T18:42:00.000-06:00

The reason for sharping is when you resize an image to a smaller size you lose detail, so you have to sharpen that image to bring that detail back.

Yes, because what if you were purposfully, "artful...

2007-01-31T18:37:00.000-06:00

Yes, because what if you were purposfully, "artfully" trying to have it blurry, working with your depth of field and such things as this? I think the best way to go is to have the option.

I do believe that regardless of any filters they m...

2007-01-31T18:23:00.000-06:00

I do believe that regardless of any filters they may apply, the originals are left untouched.

Interesting.... I honestly wish that there was a w...

2007-01-31T16:52:00.000-06:00

Interesting.... I honestly wish that there was a way to turn this off.

Jim
RunFatBoy ( http://www.runfatboy.net ) - Exercise for the rest of us.

They're downsizing your photos to three different,...

2007-01-31T16:46:00.000-06:00

They're downsizing your photos to three different, smaller sizes. Of course they're going to USM the thumbnails -- it's standard procedure after downsizing. I suspect the original (found by clicking "ORIGINAL") is not USM'd.

Interesting thought. Just beware that options are ...

2007-01-31T16:37:00.000-06:00

Interesting thought. Just beware that options are the easy way out when decisions can't be made -- it passes the burden/blame onto the user.

It's the design difference between Macs ("We'll figure it out for you") and Linux ("Don't like it? Reprogram it yourself"). Which one is better for the average user? Btw, I'm a Windows user, which is about half and half. There's no right answer here, just realize that more choices are not always a good thing.