PhotoBucket now charges $399 for third-party hosted images

[moparstuart]

I don't get it. DC.com allows you to post up to 4 pics per post. So what's the problem??? If you need to post more then 4 pics, just follow up on another reply and viola you got 4 more pics to post. Lather rinse repeat. So what if you got to do some resizing and renaming it's NOT that FN hard. Use your default program called PAINT.

 

Troy can probably speak to this but most of the other forums I use upload any size pic and automatically name/resize that to the forums limits. Troy has his reasons for not upgrading and I don't know if the never versions of SMF have this plugin but it would eliminate all this BS. Though it would probably up Troy's storage requirements.

exactly what i was saying ,  dont know a solution but its a pain and sometimes i just give up and dont post . So if i do that im sure a ton of others do too

[Troy]

I don't get it. DC.com allows you to post up to 4 pics per post. So what's the problem??? If you need to post more then 4 pics, just follow up on another reply and viola you got 4 more pics to post. Lather rinse repeat. So what if you got to do some resizing and renaming it's NOT that FN hard. Use your default program called PAINT.

 

Troy can probably speak to this but most of the other forums I use upload any size pic and automatically name/resize that to the forums limits. Troy has his reasons for not upgrading and I don't know if the never versions of SMF have this plugin but it would eliminate all this BS. Though it would probably up Troy's storage requirements.

exactly what i was saying ,  dont know a solution but its a pain and sometimes i just give up and dont post . So if i do that im sure a ton of others do too

You want to know why the automatic file renaming was disabled? Because certain people (<cough>Stuart</cough>) would upload the same file 60 times (I was assuming as a "signature" but without making it a signature in the profile). This takes 60 times more storage space and 60 times more bandwidth (actually more since browsers have no idea it's the same file and can't cache it). In one month our bandwidth went up almost 20%. So I shut it off. Now everyone else gets duplicate file name errors even though it's not actually the same file. Would this be a problem today? I don't know - but it was certainly a problem then!

There is a "mod" for our forum software that will do resizing on upload. I'd love to install it. However, I want to upgrade the forum first as that process usually breaks most of the mods so I'd have to install it twice. Second, with the size of pictures people are taking today (my digital camera is 17 megapixel and many phones are above 10), is anywhere from 10-30 times larger than the allowable size. The bandwidth and time it takes to upload would be equally as large. When you use Facebook (for example) the app on the phone squishes the picture before pushing it across the internet. Web sites will require the full sized file. I'm positive that the site will be blamed for being slow when someone tries to upload a bunch of 10 MB files to a thread. While the server sits on a gigantic "pipe", individuals are limited by the service in their area and their data plan. Once the file gets stored on the server, resources are required to shrink it - although the new server can handle this since it's typically only running at 1.5-3% cpu. I need to see if apps like Tapatalk will do that as well or if it just uploads the unmodified file (they didn't before). So basically we're back to having people resize their own pictures - which requires a new name so the original doesn't get overwritten. Vicious circle...

The most limiting factor with the server today is storage space. The pictures that have been uploaded so far take up 99% of the space required for the site (meaning the database of all the posts and PMs is tiny by comparison). While this is barely 1/3rd of the available disc space on the new server, even a small increase in allowable size equates to an exponential increase in the amount of space being eaten up going forward. It's the primary reason we're still on a hardware server and not "in the cloud". Everyone I know says "disc space is cheap" - but I guess they aren't paying out of their pocket for it. Maybe it's cheap to buy but certainly not to lease. Related but a different problem - the forum stores all uploads in a single directory. The sheer number of files makes backing that up (rsync can't handle it) or even browsing it nearly impossible. I am trying to work on a solution that can split it by date or something - or maybe someone has finally created a mod or the forum itself allows multiple directory paths.

With this whole Photobucket debacle I'll have to make some kind of change. I really don't want to spend a holiday weekend doing it since I rarely get days off.

Troy

[moparstuart]

I don't get it. DC.com allows you to post up to 4 pics per post. So what's the problem??? If you need to post more then 4 pics, just follow up on another reply and viola you got 4 more pics to post. Lather rinse repeat. So what if you got to do some resizing and renaming it's NOT that FN hard. Use your default program called PAINT.

 

Troy can probably speak to this but most of the other forums I use upload any size pic and automatically name/resize that to the forums limits. Troy has his reasons for not upgrading and I don't know if the never versions of SMF have this plugin but it would eliminate all this BS. Though it would probably up Troy's storage requirements.

exactly what i was saying ,  dont know a solution but its a pain and sometimes i just give up and dont post . So if i do that im sure a ton of others do too

You want to know why the automatic file renaming was disabled? Because certain people (<cough>Stuart</cough>) would upload the same file 60 times (I was assuming as a "signature" but without making it a signature in the profile). This takes 60 times more storage space and 60 times more bandwidth (actually more since browsers have no idea it's the same file and can't cache it). In one month our bandwidth went up almost 20%. So I shut it off. Now everyone else gets duplicate file name errors even though it's not actually the same file. Would this be a problem today? I don't know - but it was certainly a problem then!

There is a "mod" for our forum software that will do resizing on upload. I'd love to install it. However, I want to upgrade the forum first as that process usually breaks most of the mods so I'd have to install it twice. Second, with the size of pictures people are taking today (my digital camera is 17 megapixel and many phones are above 10), is anywhere from 10-30 times larger than the allowable size. The bandwidth and time it takes to upload would be equally as large. When you use Facebook (for example) the app on the phone squishes the picture before pushing it across the internet. Web sites will require the full sized file. I'm positive that the site will be blamed for being slow when someone tries to upload a bunch of 10 MB files to a thread. While the server sits on a gigantic "pipe", individuals are limited by the service in their area and their data plan. Once the file gets stored on the server, resources are required to shrink it - although the new server can handle this since it's typically only running at 1.5-3% cpu. I need to see if apps like Tapatalk will do that as well or if it just uploads the unmodified file (they didn't before). So basically we're back to having people resize their own pictures - which requires a new name so the original doesn't get overwritten. Vicious circle...

The most limiting factor with the server today is storage space. The pictures that have been uploaded so far take up 99% of the space required for the site (meaning the database of all the posts and PMs is tiny by comparison). While this is barely 1/3rd of the available disc space on the new server, even a small increase in allowable size equates to an exponential increase in the amount of space being eaten up going forward. It's the primary reason we're still on a hardware server and not "in the cloud". Everyone I know says "disc space is cheap" - but I guess they aren't paying out of their pocket for it. Maybe it's cheap to buy but certainly not to lease. Related but a different problem - the forum stores all uploads in a single directory. The sheer number of files makes backing that up (rsync can't handle it) or even browsing it nearly impossible. I am trying to work on a solution that can split it by date or something - or maybe someone has finally created a mod or the forum itself allows multiple directory paths.

With this whole Photobucket debacle I'll have to make some kind of change. I really don't want to spend a holiday weekend doing it since I rarely get days off.

Troy

thank you for all you do 

[cdr]

Thank you Troy !!!!!!   

[BDF]

Yes, thank you for this site! I don't intend to post a zillion pictures as I impose on others to do that for me (much appreciation to VegasCharger & johnnycharger) but I would be more than happy to chip in some $$$ for my use of the site. After all, nothing is free, right? I've gleaned MUCH useful information here.
Thanks again for keeping it up and running  

[69rtse4spd]

Yes, thank you for this site! I don't intend to post a zillion pictures as I impose on others to do that for me (much appreciation to VegasCharger & johnnycharger) but I would be more than happy to chip in some $$$ for my use of the site. After all, nothing is free, right? I've gleaned MUCH useful information here.
Thanks again for keeping it up and running  

I 2ed that thought.  .

[69bronzeT5]

Bastards!

[Troy]

What a debacle! So they changed their policy June 28th with no warning whatsoever. Today, July 7th I get an email saying I need to upgrade or my images won't be available. As other people have pointed out, even if you go to the Photobucket web site you still can't see the original picture that was linked on a forum. At that point it's no longer "3rd Party Hosting"!!!

All you guys that put your entire lives in "the cloud" should take note. Luckily, I only had Photobucket to share pictures and all the originals are on my home computers and backups. Makes it easy to just delete my account! Fixing several hundred forum posts around the web will be a lot harder.

Troy

[VegasCharger]

Good info Troy. 

Like you, I have saved files of all pics I put on PB. Basically I used PhotoBucket to be able to post pics when image hosting was required. So I just launch the certain pic from my files onto PB and always keeping my original pic on my p/c. And now more importantly onto an external 1 TB hard drive.

So no fret to me on PhotoBucket's dangling carrot. I'm not paying them a dime. They can close my account, don't care. I also don't care to back trace all of my on-line post from various forums that may have PB pic hosting to switch them out. What's gone is gone I cannot control it or wish to waste my time recovering them or stressing out about it. Even if PB doesn't close my account, I'm not using it anymore unless they revert back to the way it was. I will use different pic hosting sites from this point moving forward.

R.I.P. my PhotoBucket account. 

[Aero426]

Fixing several hundred forum posts around the web will be a lot harder.

Troy

This is the biggest problem for me.    They've broken billions of photos across the web on forums.   

[hemi-hampton]

Sounds like Ransom to me. should be illegal. LEON.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom

[Troy]

Sounds like Ransom to me. should be illegal. LEON.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom

Nope, it's all perfectly legit. Just dumb. They are a photo storage site. Somewhere in the Terms and Conditions I'm sure it says they have the right to limit their services at any time for any reason. If they didn't want people to link the pictures they shouldn't have given them the codes to do it.

I opened my account in 2004 and paid for additional storage for several years. At the most I think it was $50 per year and I was OK paying $4 and change per month. Then they made the free account have more space than the account I was paying for so I went back to the free one. Duh! Over time they have tried several different schemes for getting people to pay. I think they had an idea and just never figured out how to monetize it. I say, if YouTube can figure out how to embed ads in videos then surely Photobucket could watermark every image that gets linked. It's not that hard! I guarantee that YouTube is on a much larger scale when it comes to storage and bandwidth (of course, now they have the Google juggernaut behind them).

Good info Troy. 

Like you, I have saved files of all pics I put on PB. Basically I used PhotoBucket to be able to post pics when image hosting was required. So I just launch the certain pic from my files onto PB and always keeping my original pic on my p/c. And now more importantly onto an external 1 TB hard drive.

So no fret to me on PhotoBucket's dangling carrot. I'm not paying them a dime. They can close my account, don't care. I also don't care to back trace all of my on-line post from various forums that may have PB pic hosting to switch them out. What's gone is gone I cannot control it or wish to waste my time recovering them or stressing out about it. Even if PB doesn't close my account, I'm not using it anymore unless they revert back to the way it was. I will use different pic hosting sites from this point moving forward.

R.I.P. my PhotoBucket account. 

No, delete it yourself. Leaving it there allows them to serve up that stupid warning every time anyone sees a thread of yours anywhere on the internet. Plus they ask you why you're closing the account before they'll delete it. If you leave it alone they can include your account when they brag about the number of images they're storing and serving up. I just dropped that total by 7,684 images and 1GB of storage.

Troy

[Nacho-RT74]

Using www.postimage.io if somebody is interested.

Free accoung ( by now ) and ads free.

[Nacho-RT74]

Sounds like Ransom to me. should be illegal. LEON.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransom

So thats how it calls in english what we live daily down here!

[VegasCharger]

No, delete it yourself. Leaving it there allows them to serve up that stupid warning every time anyone sees a thread of yours anywhere on the internet. Plus they ask you why you're closing the account before they'll delete it. If you leave it alone they can include your account when they brag about the number of images they're storing and serving up. I just dropped that total by 7,684 images and 1GB of storage.

Troy

Thanks for the tip Troy. 

So did you just delete your account? Removed the pics first and then delete account? If so did you remove the pics one at a time, one folder at a time?

The only reason I thought to keep my PB account active is if they decided that they made a mistake and reverted back to 3rd party imaging for free. That way my pics would still be intact. But now that I think about it, why would I trust them in the future? They could just pull the same BS again. Thankfully all of my PhotoBucket pics are on an external hard drive.

[Aero426]

So did you just delete your account? Removed the pics first and then delete account? If so did you remove the pics one at a time, one folder at a time?

If there are pics you want to save from PB to your computer,   I believe you will have to do them one at a time.   I did not see a bulk download or anything like that.
If your pics are on your hard drive already , you have no worries.  

       

[Troy]

I had all my pictures saved locally so I just deleted the account. I only put the small/resized version up there and kept the hi-res originals on my PC. It will purge all your pictures when it closes (although they say this could take 2 days).

If you need to download them I thought I saw a way to save entire folders. Used to they had a "utility" that would allow you to drag and drop from your hard drive and it worked both ways. They may have changed this when they went to the more dynamic format. I haven't had much luck making their site work in over a year.

Once again, today I was looking at an ad someone posted. They linked to their Photobucket account (the whole account - not a picture). While browsing through their folders I got that 3rd party warning several times. You cannot see the actual picture even when browsing the Photobucket site!!! This is in direct conflict with what they are saying.

Troy

[BLK 68 R/T]

Just deleted my account. One thing I did do though was as Troy mentioned, you might still be able to see all your pictures in a build thread because your browser has them cached. So for my thread, I went to each page, I only have like 5 so it didn't take long, click print and do it to a PDF and saved it to my desk top. I think you could then create an attachment of a PDF so that others could view your thread in PDF form with pictures up until the Photobucket snafu.

[lloyd3]

Fire Photobucket and go to Imgur. None of those blasted commercials and it is very compatible with Droid-based cellphones. A little reading and practice and you're off and running. Much quicker to use and zero brain-damage. I'm not closing or deleting anything, just moving on. I really don't care what Photobucket does, hopefully they'll go under.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

[moparnation74]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

[timmycharger]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

Or lets go a step further and get a dedicated forum for those who feel they are better than everyone else and if a car is not an original hemi or high dollar, its crap..! yea sounds great, we can call it mycarisbetterthanyours.com

[Nacho-RT74]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

Don't missundertand me, please, but... have you lot of friends around? Is not that you could be wrong or right, but the way you say it!

Is offensive!

Lot of ppl deserves a bit more respect!

( I support what Timmy posted )

Once again, don't missundertand me, I use to be a friendly guy ( I think, so far so good just one declaired enemy around LOL  ) and I am being now, but is not the first time a got a crash reading your posts, some of them on my own threads when I request some help/support

--------


Being on topic...

This PB deal is a HUGE crash. Try to make ANY image search in google, not just cars of course! Maybe 20% image data is now missed from any search. Lot of FORMAL websites used it!, not just personal accounts!

[Lennard]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

Looks like you guys need to dissappear to fbbo.com forever. Wouldn't be a loss. You guys have the rich people syndrome.

[Mytur Binsdirti]

Since many of the new "project" Charger pictures posted here now are stripped rotted out wrecks that really are just fugitives from the crusher, I can honestly say that I'm glad to see those pictures vanish.

But this does lead to another point; if this is the trend that this site is going towards, it may be worth consideration of a separate category for those who cherish roached out junk. Either that or just rename this forum to rustyjunkdc.com.

Sounds like a worthwhile plan to me. 

Or lets go a step further and get a dedicated forum for those who feel they are better than everyone else and if a car is not an original Hemi or high dollar, its crap..! yea sounds great, we can call it mycarisbetterthanyours.com

Now that's just being silly. But please tell me, at what point of ruin and decay does a Dodge Charger be considered as junk? Surely you must realize that it will cost the same amount of money to restore the body of a 318 Charger and it does a 383, 440 or Hemi powered Charger given that they are in equal conditions. It's common knowledge that a 383 Charger is worth more than a 318 powered Charger while a 440 R/T is worth more than a 383 powered Charger, and a Hemi powered car is worth more than the 440 Charger. It just doesn't make economic sense to put 40+ grand into a 318 Charger while it is worthwhile to put that kind of dough into a 440 or Hemi powered R/T. There are many factors that determine the value of a vehicle and a "restored" rusted wreck is not going to be worth as much as another car with original sheet metal.

It's a fact that most of our cars are money pits and it's also a fact that most of us are not going to keep their Chargers forever. As such, it makes sense to invest (if you want to call it that) your money into a car that will give you the better return and a rusted & dented shell of a car isn't it.

Here's what's left of what once was a V-code Superbird. Someone thought enough of it to drag it to Carlisle last week and display it, but to me, anyone who would think that this twisted pile of rotted sheet metal to be a worthy of a restoration is out of their mind.