You are absolutely right: I am using my Fritz-box to create a ‘dropbox-like storage/sharing facility’
I was just wondering what self-hosting means in the context of Pixelfed.
As far as I’m aware, Pixelfed removes the color profile off the photos. I would avoid until that problem is fixed.
Seems like that could possibly be changing:
You can even opt to disable optimizations to preserve your original photo!
Let’s hope this setting makes it to the web version.
1 Like
That’s an interesting reason.
in this day and age of short attention spans and rapid scrolling, I’m not sure that posting photos publicly should carry any expectation of the poster that people will like/comment/share.
I do actually think that a photo’s lifecycle is something like -
Photographer sees an image
Captures image
Adjusts the image to match their vision/recollection/artistic interpretation and then
Publishes/shares it.
with out that last step I’m not sure how the photo “lives on”.
I recall many years ago when I was actively walking around taking photos i met a lady who with the obvious shared interest/passion got chatting to and I was quite impressed with her images on the back of her camera she showed me and I asked “where to do you share them?” as I would have certainly followed her.
Her answer really surprised me, she said she didn’t that she didn’t want people stealing them or not liking them, so she only took photos for herself.
And that’s fine by me, I was like wow, OK. I said that worrying about theft for a non professional (as in making a living from their work) or people not liking it was robbing the world of a snapshot in time that you captured and shared.
We sort of discussed this a bit but I certainly wasn’t looking to change her views, they’re hers after all.
But to me I have thought about that chance meeting and her perspective quite a bit and when I started to doubt myself, etc, I’d remind myself that I’m only sharing a snapshot in time as I see it and as I wish to present it, I don’t care that you like it or that it doesn’t get a lot of views, likes etc.
But I always have a backlog of images in instagram to scroll through. Lately I just use my phone and edit with Snapseed and post to Instagram, my big camera stays mostly on the shelf. But as I approach retirement (single digits away) I like that I have hte option of putting a camera back in my hands and once again challenge myself with primes or chase birds in the bush etc.
Actually if you really want to get lots of views, take photos of shop fronts and and cafe food and post to google maps, I have billions of combined views with the photos I’ve posted! 
5 Likes
I’ll be your friend on Flickr. Here, too.
Yeah. I posted a photo of the front of a tiny Mexican restaurant in a little strip mall, and it has gotten hundreds of thousands of views. I have no idea why. There is absolutely nothing interesting about it.
3 Likes
I’m also on Flickr. I appreciate that it’s a fee-for-service company: I pay them an annual subscription, and in return I get unlimited storage and a reasonably convenient interface for posting my images. It’s not supporting itself through ubiquitous surveillance (I don’t think?), and seems to be reasonably well-run.
I did look briefly at pixel-fed and other options, but I think I would blow through the storage limits of most alternatives that are free, and the Flickr pro option was very competitive in terms of storage per dollar. My account serves as a (sort of) backup of jpgs of my best images, since I post everything full size there.
I don’t engage in the community there very much, but it’s very convenient to send album links to friends and family to share a recent trip or event.
If you are more active, you can submit your photos to countless special interest groups, where it will be promoted into the feeds of group members. I haven’t done that too much, but it could be a way to get more people to see your images.
1 Like
Tbh, I don’t think it’s a problem to be greedy for recognition, it’s human nature, though of course it breaks the pretence to admit so.
I think one problem when discussing these issues (and I think I’ve started a similar thread in the past) is that we’re often seeking recognition from forums that are either generic distraction engines (insta - see all the photographer complaints when it made this obvious by profitably shifting to stickier video from stills) or have the ‘wrong’ audience.
In the latter case, it’s that people who aren’t into photography as a thing in itself aren’t looking at images for the image-making at all. Like Tim’s example of the Mexican restaurant.
It’s like going into a bar after winning the adulation of your peers at a Star Trek convention and hoping you’ll impress a random guy or gal with your knowledge of Klingon grammar.
6 Likes
This is a sad reflection on how the dubious concept of “Intellectual Property” has insinuated itself into society at large. I understand for professional photographers (and other forms of creators), you need to protect your livelihood. But for the rest of us, what is actually being ‘stolen’? If you weren’t planning to sell the image yourself, then you don’t lose anything by sharing it.
It’s only after we label something as ‘property’ that we start dreaming up ways that that property can be stolen.
2 Likes
It’s possible to rack up a large following on Flickr (1000+ followers) if you are prepared to play the long game of liking, commenting on others work, posting in groups, etc… but it all felt hollow to me. Lots of people liking very average photographs in hope to catch some of the blow back for themselves. Of course, most people are self interested, and even your best shots will be forgotten by tomorrow, lost in a sea of probably billions of images.
I came to see the real benefit was not in trying to get popular but simply having a free gallery requiring no maintenance that you can show people who ask to see your work. Your own website could also serve this purpose, with the benefit of appearing more professional, and the downside of costing money. Not really a downside, if you are actually professional.
7 Likes
I have also met people who have this attitude but for me that’s really strange, producing art for oneself. I have a phd in art and I think I know a few things about it. The thing that I am most sure about is the fact that art is a social thing, there is no point in producing art just for yourself. It’s something to talk and discuss about, and above all to share.
4 Likes
This is a bit dogmatic in my opinion… There’s lots of artists that created art merely for cathartic purposes or self enjoyment, sometimes only having their work published posthumously.
3 Likes
More! Just for fun, I asked a search engine this question: “How many photos are uploaded to social networks daily?”
The first link gave the following info, no idea if it’s accurate or not, but you’ll get the idea.
5 Likes
I don’t know about the specific jargon “Intellectual property” but copyright in works of art, photographs, paintings, writings etc has been around for a long time. Probably patents, for technical ideas, also goes way back.
Bottom line is that they help, if (a big if) one can be bothered to enforce it, prevent the passing off of your pictures by someone else, as their own, maybe even profiting from it.
Having worked for a publisher of pictures, in pre-internet days, I imbibed a considerable respect for copyright, and even the idea of copyright. The internet/web seems to have made it all largely irrelevant now: I’m a bit sad about that.
1 Like
How you get an invitation, when due to anti-Spam measures the registration on many Mastodon instances is closed by default?
1 Like
1.7 billion
The number of photos edited in Google Photos every month.
(25 surprising Google facts to celebrate our 25th birthday)
Though not images/photography:
Viewers globally watch more than 1 billion hours on average of YouTube content on their TVs every day
YouTube Shorts is now averaging over 70 billion daily views
500+ hours of content uploaded every minute
(YouTube for Press)
An interesting number would be: how many of those photos are displayed for more than 2 seconds on a screen in average?
I don’t disagree with any of that in principle. Copyright is vital to protecting artistic works, and we’re better off for it.
Where I take issue is a) that everything we create should be treated as property by default and b) that copyright needs to extend beyond the lifetime of the creator.
My issue with a) is that we have, or had, a rich intellectual ‘commons’ that exists outside of any financial market. The dominance of commercial interests has obscured the possibility that we might consider our creations as something other than a commodity to be protected.
That said, I fully support an artist using copyright to secure their livelihood. I just think there are other ways to think of creative activities that are underappreciated in our current system.
As far as b), since we as individuals are limited to a single lifetime, copyright terms that extend beyond that length can only ever benefit immortal corporations. A reasonable term of a few decades would provide all the benefits creators need without the stifling effect of the current system.
1 Like
@Thomas_Do If I remember well I just sent a message to the admin asking for an invitation. He replied quite rapidly
2 Likes
Always good to know:
The same is happening with Tumblr and Flickr, the reason why I closed my accounts on all theses 3 platforms. And also be aware that on Mastodon anyone can download your pictures (at the size you posted them of course). And finally if you think that your personal “right click protected” website is a safe place for your pictures there is this: extract.media 
…
2 Likes