SmugMug Buys Flickr, Vows To Revitalize the Photo Service (usatoday.com)

On Friday, Silicon Valley photo-sharing and storage company SmugMug announced it had acquired Flickr, the photo-sharing site created in 2004 by Ludicorp and acquired in 2005 by Yahoo. SmugMug CEO Don MacAskill told USA TODAY he's committed to revitalizing the faded social networking site, which hosted photos and videos long before it became trendy. Flickr will reportedly continue to operate separately, and SmugMug and Flickr accounts will "remain separate and independent for the foreseeable future." From the report: He declined to disclose the terms of the deal, which closed this week. "Flickr is an amazing community, full of some of the world's most passionate photographers. It's a fantastic product and a beloved brand, supplying tens of billions of photos to hundreds of millions of people around the world," MacAskill said. "Flickr has survived through thick-and-thin and is core to the entire fabric of the Internet." The surprise deal ends months of uncertainty for Flickr, whose fate had been up in the air since last year when Yahoo was bought by Verizon for $4.5 billion and joined with AOL in Verizon's Oath subsidiary.

Comments

Could be really good

[SuperKendall]

I still feel like Flickr has one of the best viewing experiences for photographs around, much better than Instagram, which is more about casual lifestyle photos, or even 500px which is more of a direct competitor... Flickr is really nice for following people who like to take more considered and composed photos than just random bits of this or that.

Re:Could be really good

[ColdWetDog]

Flikr's major problem (aside from spell checkers) is Yahoo.

I've had a Flickr account for ages. When my old email address up and died I lost control of my photos because the idiots can't figure out how to deal with a dead email. They've sent me to all sorts of pages to attempt to resolve my reality but their old data is so fucked up that they're convinced I'm not me.

Sending an actual, physical, printed letter to my permanent address or talking to my credit card companies seems well beyond their capabilities.

So, good luck with this.

(They're also going to have to deal with video. Stills are so 21st Century.)

Re:Could be really good

[93 Escort Wagon]

Flickr is really nice for following people who like to take more considered and composed photos than just random bits of this or that.

The problem is, the number of photographers who like to take “more considered and composed photos” is not growing particularly fast (or maybe at all), while the selfie-shooters keep inundating us with ever-accelerating piles of crap photos - what Instagram is good for.

Yes, I am old - and I really don’t get the insistence that every image of a place needs to have the person taking the photo as the focus. When you’re at the Eiffel Tower, that should be the focus!

I had a paid Flickr account for quite a number of years, but I eventually stopped. It didn’t seem like they were adding much which appealed to actual photographers - instead, they focused on trying to draw the phone-photo crowd.

Flickr

[RandomFactor]

I made a Flickr account ages ago, but never really used it.

So the question is, is Flickr actually useful for sharing videos a la Youtube? If so, is it any less evil?

Re:Flickr

[jader3rd]

They probably have a lower max file size that Youtube. My sister mentioned having one video she wanted posted to flickr which bumped into it, but I've never hit that limit.

Can't be any worse

[thegarbz]

Than Verizon owning it.

Re:Can't be any worse

[applewax]

Yes, thank God they're getting away from Verizon, and being acquired by another company whose core business is photography. I can't imagine anything good would have come from being owned by Verizon.

Re:Can't be any worse

[sheramil]

O rly? Remember what happened to Photobucket?

Re:Can't be any worse

[apoc.famine]

No. What happened to Photobucket?

They better not cut back on storage

[jader3rd]

1TB free is the primary reason why I used flickr. That and that's where all of my siblings post their pictures.

Re:They better not cut back on storage

[itsme1234]

With google offering a very seamless "unlimited" if you let them "scale down" to 16Mpixel or 1080p (more than enough for all casual users) I see it unlikely that flickr will put any tighter limits than now, at least for total pictures.

Not really good for video

[SuperKendall]

Flickr is really only good for stills. One thing SmugMug could do is really improve support for videos, including 360 video playback...

I have over 24,000 pix on Flickr

[shubus]

Yes, that's a lot of photos and I'm worried. How long before they start changing things and turn Flickr into crap? They say "no changes" - but by now we've learned not to believe such statements from tech companies. It's a wakeup call that my pix may become lost and I'd best start moving them NOW.

Re:I have over 24,000 pix on Flickr

[reboot246]

You don't have backups?!?

I've been a Smugmug customer for years and they have really good terms of service, the best of which is they don't claim rights to my photographs.

Re:I have over 24,000 pix on Flickr

[shubus]

Of course I have backups! But all these pics are ORGANIZED on Flickr....much more than just a photo stream.

Re:I have over 24,000 pix on Flickr

[Cederic]

Given I've been a Smugmug customer for years because they provide a better service than Flickr (and others) if anything I'd expect the Flickr service to improve.

It may change prices, but Macaskill and his team put proper engineering, customer centricity and business nous into Smugmug and it would be a surprise if they abandon that with Flickr.

Incidentally https://www.uploadjunction.com... might be useful for you. Or Smugmug offer tools to migrate to them ;)

Re: Not that great...

[Anonymous Coward]

They should have prayed for a better company name.

Not a problem for what it is though

[SuperKendall]

The problem is, the number of photographers who like to take âoemore considered and composed photosâ is not growing particularly fast (or maybe at all), while the selfie-shooters keep inundating us

That's not a problem for Flickr though - at least anymore.

Under Yahoo they may have wanted that kind of growth from Flickr. But SmugMug is an owner used to more serious photographic professionals, so they will understand that the growth will be much slower than Instagram or the like.

It didnâ(TM)t seem like they were adding much which appealed to actual photographers - instead, they focused on trying to draw the phone-photo crowd.

I've been a paid Flickr user for many years and am currently. I don't think it's exactly right to say the focused on the phone-photo crowd so much as they overhauled the UI to look much better on modern devices. All of the features more processional users like (like EXIF shot summaries) are still there, they would be gone if Flickr had been trying to go after phone photographers as a primary customer...

And again, as noted SmugMug is an owner used to dealing with real photographers so whatever changes they make should consider people with more serious cameras above phone photographers.

Re:Not a problem for what it is though

[93 Escort Wagon]

I find this buyout mildly amusing since, way back when I was first considering a paid online photo service, I kept vacillating between SmugMug and Flickr - and eventually went with Flickr. What goes around, comes around - Flickr customers are now SmugMug customers.

I really hope it works out for both. I am glad Flickr’s back in the hands of people who care about photography.

Re:Not a problem for what it is though

[coofercat]

The single quickest way to find a half-way decent Creative Commons photo to use in your next work presentation or social media post is Flickr. Flickr is still well stocked with good quality snaps and 'proper photography' that has a working 'search by license', and doesn't have some weird download requirement that tries to trick you into paying or getting subscription or whatever. Other sites exist, but you'd have to visit a dozen of them to get a similar choice of pictures to choose from.

Flickr's not "on the up" like it once was, but hopefully SmugMug will at least keep the good bits.

Re:Not a problem for what it is though

[SuperKendall]

Great points, all of my own work there is carefully marked with Creative Commons licenses so others can use, I also felt like the licensing part was well done.

Re:Does it target ads?

[Cederic]

as far as I understand smugmug sells photos and clothing with the pictures

You misunderstand.

Users of Smugmug can choose to enable sale of photographs but it is the photographer's choice and not that of Smugmug. Smugmug make little if anything from those sales too, the fees go to the printers.

The professional grade accounts on Smugmug can choose the prices and receive the income too. They can also use more expensive print shops should they choose.

None of my galleries have sales enabled.