Flickr locking accounts from 8 January

[Mesquite]

I've just had a notification from Flickr saying that my account is going to be locked from 8 January 2019 as they're going to limit you to a max of 1000 pictures.

If you want unlimited then you have to pay for Flickr Pro at £3.99 per month (paid as one yearly subscription)

Looks like I'm going to have to create some extra email addresses to get around it

 

[MrEd]

yeah i deleted all my photos (after downloading). wont be using them anymore, the service has gone downhill in the past few years tbh

 

[Mesquite]

yeah i deleted all my photos (after downloading). wont be using them anymore, the service has gone downhill in the past few years tbh

I was tempted to do that but then I'd loose most of my recent forum pictures same way as Photobucket screwed everyone over

 

[brancho]

I have had a pro account for years.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

 

[Nice65]

Less than half the price of Photobucket. I got the email saying I was close to the picture limit and I don’t even use Flickr. Must have an old account, but it’s no way got nearly 1000 pics in it.

 

[Wander]

I don't get the panic about image hosting sites wanting to limit/charge.
Does anyone really store their images solely on a website rather than on their own hard drive and backed up?

I use Flickr and have no problems. I've not had any notification from them, but then I'd be no where near that 1000 limit. I only host images on Flickr when I want to link to them somewhere, and after several months I delete images that have gone way down the list - I doubt I have many more than two or three dozen images on there at any one time. I have the originals on my hard drive and backed up. So if Flickr did decide to throw a spaz then...well, sod it. I couldn't care less, personally.
I won't lose anything.

As alluded to above the way around it is dead easy - create multiple accounts with different email addresses and keep them under the limit. If they want to play dirty (and I don't think they are really - they are offering FREE storage at cost to themselves. Quite naturally they are going to realise that can't carry on), then play dirty back.

But still well worth being aware of.

 

[Nice65]

I don't get the panic about image hosting sites wanting to limit/charge.
Does anyone really store their images solely on a website rather than on their own hard drive and backed up?

I use Flickr and have no problems. I've not had any notification from them, but then I'd be no where near that 1000 limit. I only host images on Flickr when I want to link to them somewhere, and after several months I delete images that have gone way down the list - I doubt I have many more than two or three dozen images on there at any one time. I have the originals on my hard drive and backed up. So if Flickr did decide to throw a spaz then...well, sod it. I couldn't care less, personally.
I won't lose anything.

As alluded to above the way around it is dead easy - create multiple accounts with different email addresses and keep them under the limit. If they want to play dirty (and I don't think they are really - they are offering FREE storage at cost to themselves. Quite naturally they are going to realise that can't carry on), then play dirty back.

But still well worth being aware of.

All well and good, but when Photobucket went, it destroyed countless blogs, tutorials, and forum posts.

I use Postimage without bothering to even open an account, just linking to a photo stored in my computer.

 

[Wander]

Hmm...I've just had a look at Postimage.
That looks like a good way around it.