|
|
Image hosting limitation?
Hi,
I was just reading the rules in the Readers Rides forum that state that all images must be hosted by Imageshack. Is that still a rule?
I have just demonstrated in the Test forum how to link a thumbnail from flickr (also linking back to the original photo page as per flickr rules) that would seem to be a very appropriate method of posting images here.
Cheers,
Chris.
|
|
3/Jun/2008, 1:44 pm
|
|
|
|
Re: Image hosting limitation?
Chris,
It's not really a limitation, rather to ensure your posted and hosted photos which are included in your thread remain valid and visible for as long as you have an ImageShack account.
This hosting provider has proven to be VERY reliable in the long run and it is the most common photo hosting place that is being integrated as part of many boards worldwide.
Flickr on the other hand is not as reliable when it comes to ensuring availability of the hosted photos and I have previously used them, only to find dead links and pics later on.
We don't restrict members with their choice of image hosting providers, however we give guidance on the most reliable ones to use and which has been successfully intergrated as part of our board.
Last edited by jalalski, 3/Jun/2008, 6:23 pm
|
|
3/Jun/2008, 6:22 pm
|
|
|
|
Re: Image hosting limitation?
Thanks for the reply, Jalal.
I'd be surprised if photos hosted on flickr became unavailable except through decisions made by the user (such as deleting a photo, etc). I guess it is possible that flickr changes url structure over time, thus invalidating the original ref.
It does seem that Imageshack have a very large bucket to hold what must be millions of photos, and I agree that they seem to be a pretty stable host. They have been around for as long as I can recall. Wouldn't it be fun to pore over the images that people upload. Almost like hitting the Random link button on Wikipedia!! Ok, that might just be me...
Chris.
|
|
4/Jun/2008, 12:40 pm
|
|
