Photofuckit bastards!!!

Post by **norks27** » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:29 pm

RattyMcClelland wrote:No organisation or folder, cannot figure out for the life of me where the image links are for forums.

It is a bit messy, easy to do from PC, but can't figure out the app.
If I do a job lot of uploads from the phone then it groups them all into an album/collection, (such as all the Donnington pics), but can't then get the individual links to [IMG] paste [IMG] onto a forum post.

Only way, via phone, is to access imgur via web browser and copy image location, e.g. https://i.imgur.com/mWOkCIO.jpg and then paste with [IMG] either side.

For those of you with Build Threads dating back years I seriously feel your pain. I assume 'photoarsewipebucket' will soon go out of business.

mart609 · Post by **mart609** » Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:04 pm

complete and utter Clubbing Eddy stains.
I hope the palce where they're hosting burns down

Post by **indigolemon** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:12 pm

NafemanNathan wrote:It's also some how removed all of the text from my signature as well!

Nah, its just pushed it out of the bottom of the viewable area - their ransom image is taking up all the allowed space.

Post by **indigolemon** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:17 pm

I'm double posting, because I can

From what I'm seeing on other forums I frequent, this appears to be another viable alternative to Photobucket:

https://www.imageupload.co.uk/

As always though, keep backups of any images you throw at these sites if they're important to you!

Post by **vanzep** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:49 pm

nice
will give that a go

Post by **NafemanNathan** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 9:52 pm

indigolemon wrote:
NafemanNathan wrote:It's also some how removed all of the text from my signature as well!
Nah, its just pushed it out of the bottom of the viewable area - their ransom image is taking up all the allowed space.

Ahh I see. I did wonder how they'd effected that part!

Does that other image host have a button you can push that will download all your pics from Photofuckit and re-establish the existing Photofuckit codes?

Post by **indigolemon** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 10:03 pm

NafemanNathan wrote:Does that other image host have a button you can push that will download all your pics from Photofuckit and re-establish the existing Photofuckit codes?

Wouldn't that be wonderful! Sadly no, no-one can do that as your links will all point to photobucket owned domains, so no matter where you go - you're looking at re-establishing all your photo links

Post by **NafemanNathan** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 10:21 pm

Yeah, I was joking

Post by **simonc** » Mon Jul 10, 2017 1:20 am

Call me stupid, (you're stupid, Simon), but why have they done this?

Confused · Post by **Confused** » Mon Jul 10, 2017 7:57 am

simonc wrote:Call me stupid, (you're stupid, Simon), but why have they done this?

Storing images for people takes a lot of disk space on servers. This costs money.

Showing these images to people takes a lot of data transfer. This costs money.

Lots of websites use adverts on their site to offset the cost of running the site.

When you link to an image on Photobucket on another website (such as this one) and someone views this page, you're using their storage, and their data transfer - but the critical thing is that the viewer of the images are not seeing any of Photobucket's own pages - so no adverts are shown to the viewer.

So - Photobucket have now said that they're not prepared to offer this any more, and are preventing all images stored on their server from being shown if you're not viewing their site.

Which, is kind of OK, really, because it's not a sustainable business model (however, it *has* been their business model for nearly 10 years, and is the main reason why they're as large as they are...) - so they've decided to ask people to pay for this service.

However, where it backfired, is that they have priced it at least 40x higher than most people would be willing to pay. I'm sure many people would have been prepared to pay $10 per year to continue using the service - but they're asking for $400 a year, which is utterly ludicrous. Sure, even at $10 per year many of their users would go elsewhere, but I'm sure they'll have made much more money by charging only $10 per year than they'll ever make charging $400!