What Is the Maximum File Upload Size for Flickr

Mike Slade. bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Why should I spend my money on Flickr if it turns out it is just as restrictive equally whatever one of the other online photo sites?

Screen shots no matter how clever are not photographs, just saying.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

~andre bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

I have a number of high-res blended photos that I cannot upload to Flickr but because they are larger than 200MB in size. And that's with a Pro business relationship.

High-resolution or simply uncompressed TIFF images?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

wildhareuk bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

I estimate all the other sites are restrictive for the same reason. Storage is still not costless, even in 2020!!
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

~andre:

Loftier-resolution or simply uncompressed TIFF images?

Loftier-res JPEG. No TIFF or PNG or any other format.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

wildhareuk:

Storage is yet not free, even in 2020!!

Did y'all fifty-fifty bother reading my original mail? I am paying for storage. Pro accounts aren't free.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

~andre bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Loftier-res JPEG. No TIFF or PNG or any other format.

What's the resolution then to produce a 200 MB JPEG and what kind of JPEG - lossless or using some specialized parameters?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

wildhareuk bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

I did read your original post, thank you! I was giving a reason for other sites being restrictive on size. You lot do seem to be a bit touchy!!
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

~andre:

> What'south the resolution then to produce a 200 MB JPEG [ ... ]

350DPI JPEG. Every bit produced by converting a 45MP NEF (D850) or 42.5MP ARW (A99M2) to a JPEG using DxO gear up to loftier quality.

350DPI is the native RAW -> JPEG conversion resolution for both cameras mentioned above.

JPEG is never lossless. It's e'er lossy. JP2 (JPEG-2000) can be lossless but I'm not talking about JP2.

These are non images produced by a single photograph. For that resolution, a unmarried-photograph JPEG image at 350DPI can be anywhere between 42MB and 80MB. Sometimes even less than 42MB depending of what'south in the prototype.

These are composite images constructed from several photographs. Not necessarily pano's, because the construction is not always a horizontal project.

I have composite images that were synthetic from anywhere between 9 to 18 distinct photographs.

Yes, there's overlap in all of them so the resulting paradigm size is not a directly multiplier of all the private unmarried photographs.

Merely the size of the resulting JPEG tin can be anywhere between 248MB and 468MB.

And I am not willing to downsample the resolution considering that results in a very noticeable loss of image quality.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

wildhareuk:

I was giving a reason for other sites beingness restrictive on size.

You lot didn't give a reason. Storage isn't free is not a justification for imposing image size restrictions on paid -- read: not gratis memberships. Be it at Flicker, or anywhere else.

Since I am talking about a paid membership, the reasonable thing to do would be to have a tiered pricing scheme.

Merely that'south not what Flickr, or Smugmug, practise. Both of them decided by fiat that an image cannot be larger than 200MB, menses. For a paid membership, that's not adequate.

I would be more than than willing to pay more for a Pro membership that provides a higher prototype size limit. That would be reasonable.

Yous do seem to be a bit touchy!!

Your comment was completely besides the indicate.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Mike Slade. bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

If you really took photo's the file size would be fine uploading to a PHOTO site. No need to telephone call me names sport
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

John Frattura bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

What are the dimensions of one of the images that are over 200mbs?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

~andre bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

350DPI JPEG

Only every bit a side note, DPI setting is meaningless for images. It comes from programs that brandish images in diverse measurements, like inches or centimeters, and when epitome is edited in pixels, DPI setting literally has no meaning without mentioning units for those measurements. Pixel dimensions and compression format are the merely things that thing. Anyway, I will exit this alone.

Flickr is not a storage site or a fill-in site or a hosting site. It is a showcase site and, every bit such, it has not purpose for 200-400 MB images because those are not typically displayed in browsers. Drilling down to the 100% view on a 12000px image is besides not a function that Flickr promotes, even with their new 6K image support.

I do get that this is how you lot want to utilise it, but I'm but proverb Flickr is non intended for such use.

Stefan Teleman:

I am paying for storage.

Many storage sites use the trick of allocating payments from users with low storage to embrace those that use a lot of storage. Flickr is ane of them.

$fifty/yr buys one about 150 GB of storage in AWS and anyone with thousands of 200+ MB images would crave multiple other Pro accounts to comprehend the costs. Considering that free users can practice that as well, I certain promise Flickr does not consider epitome size limit increase considering then they would accept to raise the subscription price for all of the states.

Heck, I hope they introduce a special account type for 6+K image holders that volition be priced based on the actual storage, so the rest of us wouldn't carry this burden.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

~andre bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Grammer, sport.

Keep at it - you will just become yourself banned from the forum.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

John Frattura:

> What are the dimensions of one of the images that are over 200mbs?

261MB -- 13273x27068 pixels.
JPEG TrueColor V1.one.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

~andre:

> Go along at it - you volition simply get yourself banned from the forum.

I advise you do not brand threats.

If you have something constructive, or useful, to add to this thread, you're welcome to contribute. Threats are neither constructive, nor useful.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

~andre bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

If you have something effective, or useful, to add to this thread, y'all're welcome to contribute. Threats are neither constructive, nor useful.

I did contribute.

As for a threat, it would be one if I had whatever power to do so, which I don't. I merely informed you how this forum works. In that location is a difference.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

> Keep at information technology - y'all will simply become yourself banned from the forum.

I suggest y'all do not make threats.

Manifestly not a "threat", just simply a heads up about how things stand on this Help Forum.

Andre shell me to it by 28 secs...my dull typing....
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

~andre:

As for a threat, information technology would be 1 if I had any power to do and then, which I don't.

A threat is that which is perceived as a threat by the intended recipient.

In which case your you volition become banned comment was all the more inappropriate, since - by your own admission - your personal opinions exercise not represent Flickr's policies.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

your personal opinions

Nope. Non "opinion".

Because the remark stems from the author's personal observations on this forum, over a number of years where information technology concerns abuse cases.
(ED. Which are my own observations likewise btw.)
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )
MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest mengedit topik ini 28 bulan yang lalu.

EHBusman1958 bilang:

I know every flickr fellow member has a right to put a betoken across, but someone who has only uploaded 72 photo'south for public viewing in 15 years and but has 5 followers is flogging a dead equus caballus when complaining he cant upload large file size photo,south lol and iam not being ruded to him, just put a point across :o)
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

~andre:

Merely as a side annotation, DPI setting is meaningless for images.

No, it is non:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dots_per_inch
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_density

The 2 terms are - unfortunately - used interchangeably. But they are non meaningless. That'due south an urban legend.

Having said that:

one. I am perfectly aware of what Flickr is and is not. Its main function is to be an image display site, with some added metadata brandish capabilities related to those images.
2. You cannot have an image display site without having storage capabilities. I.e. Flickr is, and has to be, a storage site. Otherwise it cannot function as an prototype display site.
3. The "no prototype can exist larger than 200MB in size" restriction is completely artificial, and has no basis in fact. This size limitation does non exist in the JPEG Standard, and information technology plainly does not exist in any photo processing software. If it did, I would not exist able to create images that are larger than 200MB.
iv. The JPEG Standard imposes 1, and merely one limitation on image size: 65535x65535 pixels. That's it.
v. Flickr doesn't respect the JPEG Standard.
6. At this bespeak, Flickr is completely useless to me, and to anyone that creates images that end up being larger than 200MB in size. I am not going to waste my time uploading photos/images here, when I've already done that at Smugmug, also with a paid membership. At Smugmug, I ran into the same exact limitation, and had to exclude all the images that were larger than 200MB.
vii. Playing "tricks" with image size limitations does not convey a message of honesty to those who pay for a Flickr Pro membership.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

EHBusman1958:

Yes, I gave up on Flickr in 2007, afterwards Yahoo! started imposing all kinds of restrictions on having a Flickr business relationship. 1 of them being that yous had to have a Yahoo! account.

I did non desire to have a Yahoo! login.

Smugmug acquired Flickr final twelvemonth. I thought that would make things somewhat better. It did non.

For starters, Smugmug couldn't figure out how to integrate Flickr with itself. As a issue, I could no longer login to my Flickr account. Non with the Flickr credentials, and not with with the Smugmug credentials either.

Information technology took Smugmug and Flickr a full year to sort that mess out. Finally I could finally re-login to my Flickr account in December 2019.

I have plenty of photos and images posted at Smugmug. Non all my work over the by x+ years is posted there. I mainly mail at that place things that I did for myself for fun, and that I did not get paid to do, and that I tin can post freely.

But thanks, anyway.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

John Frattura bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

If you leave flickr because of their size limits, you may find that other sites are but as "unreasonable". But I could be wrong. Good luck.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

wildhareuk bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Smugmug has never expressed any intention to integrate Smugmug with Flickr. They remain split entities. The login process has always been completely separate.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

John Frattura:

> [ ... ] yous may find that other sites are just as "unreasonable".

I know other sites are just as unreasonable. It's a question of whether it is worth my time re-uploading images here, only to run into the same verbal file size limitations I already ran into at Smugmug. Smugmug has the aforementioned bogus restrictions on image size.

At this betoken, Flickr actually isn't worth my time.

500px has some incomprehensible licensing/copyright restrictions, in addition to their ain file size limitations.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

John Frattura bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Then and so what'southward the solution?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

wildhareuk:

> Smugmug has never expressed any intention to integrate Smugmug with Flickr.

That'southward not what they (Smugmug) were proverb at first.

At first, the story was that they would integrate the login credentials. And they did endeavour to do so. And in the process of failing at it, they completely messed-up the Flickr credentials.

Yes, they did say that the brands and the sites would remain divide.

As soon every bit Flickr became role of Smugmug, my Flickr login credentials stopped working. They only started working again this past December.

I am non the only ane who has experienced this problem. There's plenty of complaints about it at DPR.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

At first, the story was that they would integrate the login credentials.

Methinks y'all are misunderstanding, here is the full story, NO integration with SmugMug for login credentials, on the contrary.

www.flickr.com/assistance/forum/en-united states/72157707334766574/
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

John Frattura:

> So then what's the solution?

The solution is what I had suggested in one of my earlier posts: offer tiered pricing for Pro accounts:

- individual epitome file size up to 200MB: $XYZ per month (or yr)
- individual image file size up to 500MB: $XYZ + $Actress per month (or yr)

etc etc etc

I'd be perfectly happy with this type of pricing arrangement. And I think information technology would continue everyone else happy as well.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

The Searcher bilang:

Stefan Teleman: It'southward unlikely there is a very big market place for photo sharing requiring 200+ million images. I'g certain Flickr did some focus testing on that, and looked at the existing site stats, and likely found that only a very tiny minority of users ever even reached the existing 200m limit. While Flickr does include storage equally a characteristic, information technology's primary office is all the same a social image sharing site. That means images have to be displayable on browsers and transmittable over the internet.

Exceeding standard screen resolution/size to the scale y'all require merely isn't a high priority for an image sharing site, balancing storage costs on the other side. On the one mitt, Flickr could probably increase the file size limit and wouldn't see much change in usage. Simply on the other it may exist a low priority compared to other issues/features they'd rather focus on first.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

bluerubberoctopus bilang:

The Searcher:

Information technology'south rather interesting. While the documented limit is 200M, information technology's actually significantly smaller than that in terms of what size jpg is immune. When I was doing a lot of large format photography, and scanning 4x5 and 8x10 negatives, I would hit the (undocumented, lower) limit. I opened a instance and was told "200M is the maximum uncompressed size" - so while I recollect the OP may be a bit militant in their attitude, I would capeesh an actual, documented limitation to the current situation. I've had 20M JPGs that would not upload to flickr, because they had a lot of grain and expanded to over 200M in some "uncompressed" format. Some other limitation is the cloudfront CDN in front of the flickr origins times out on large images depending on your internet speed, well before you become to 200M. I opened a case, simply they do not offering support for the API, and I upload only via the API - my photos here are mirrored from another photograph sharing site.

The other photo sharing site I am a member of does non accept these limitations, and I am able to upload large format scans at that place.

The standard for "displayable on browsers and transmittable over the internet" changes with fourth dimension. What was in one case acceptable quality-wise now looks like a tiny thumbnail.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

The Searcher:

According to the JPEG Standard, the maximum size of a JPEG prototype is 65535x65535 pixels. That means 4,294,836,225 pixels. Or 4 Gigapixels if you wish to measure it that style.

That means: the JPEG Standard allows for a JPEG image file to be up to 4GB in size, assuming no compression and 8-fleck/pixel encoding. In reality, the image file size will be much smaller due to indexing and pinch.

I am having trouble reconciling what the JPEG Standard says with Flickr'southward "Pro" designation for their paid accounts.

> Exceeding standard screen resolution/size to the scale y'all require merely isn't a loftier priority for an image sharing site [ ... ]

If that were true, Flickr'south maximum file size limit wouldn't be anywhere near 200MB. It would be much less. You can store a 1900x1200 JPEG image at 120PPI in much less than 200MB. In fact, it would be somewhere around 4.8MB file size, if I include EXIF overhead. And 1900x1200 at 120PPI covers virtually 95% of all the laptop displays out there. And so I don't quite sympathize how this 200MB arbitrary file size limit relates to any blazon of current electronic display device.

> [ ... ] it may be a low priority compared to other issues/features they'd rather focus on get-go

And what exactly are these other issues/features that Flickr is focusing on?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Viejito bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

And what exactly are these other issues

Come on! Everything!

The limits yous are fulminating confronting were in place before you decided to pay for Pro. At present that yous institute out about them, but do non renew Pro, and good luck finding a site that allows for your unusual demands.

If you do not find a site, simply create your own. It is not that difficult.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

Viejito:

Come on! Everything!

Everything? Really?

Espresso? World Peace? Income Inequality? Climate change?

> The limits you are fulminating against were in place before y'all decided to pay for Pro.

Yeah. And?

Tin yous please explain exactly how that comment of yours is useful in any way. Because I only tin't run into it.

The limits were in that location earlier, so they must stay that fashion, 'cuz I said so. And you're a weirdo for asking for something unlike.

Would that be an authentic summary of your invaluable input?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Viejito bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Would that exist an accurate summary

No, non at all.

A more authentic summary would be that you tin can politely inquire to have the limits changed, but that paying Flickr a few dollars does non entitle you to show outrage at the existing limits and to demand that the site exist remade to your specifications.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

Viejito:

> you can politely enquire to take the limits inverse

I did that, initially.

And then a bunch of Internet Persons - with no ability whatever insofar as irresolute Flickr'due south file size limit is concerned - decided to get involved in matters that do not concern them in the least. That includes y'all, by the way.

Unless you are the CEO of Flickr, and you tin make a material conclusion with respect to the file size limit - and I already know yous aren't the CEO of Flickr - why exercise y'all bother commenting in this thread?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Viejito bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

why do yous carp commenting in this thread?

Y'all seem to exist unclear on the concept of a Aid Forum. What you post here is addressed to all users. If you merely want to speak to Flickr staff, in that location are other ways to practise that.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

Viejito:

If you merely want to speak to Flickr staff, in that location are other ways to do that.

You exercise non get to dictate the means by which I choose to raise a technical issue with the Flickr staff.

Most people would have a natural, intuitive hunch as to when their involvement is warranted, and when it is non. It would announced that yous do not possess that intuition.

No-one is forcing you to post comments in this thread.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Nionyn_ bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Unless you are the CEO of Flickr, and you can brand a material decision with respect to the file size limit - and I already know y'all aren't the CEO of Flickr - why do you bother commenting in this thread?

WTF is wrong with you lot?

If you lot want only to communicate with Flickr staff just do exactly and just that - it is not hard.
Apply this grade:
help.flickr.com/contact

Information technology is made very articulate when one posts to the Help Forum that one will be responded to by other members.
If that is not good plenty for you I fail to empathize why you lot have posted here at all.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Nionyn_ bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

You practise not get to dictate the ways by which I cull to heighten a technical consequence with the Flickr staff.

You have posted in Flickr's Help Forum, not a direct line to Flickr Staff.

As explained above, if you simply want to deal with Staff you lot are posting your angst in the incorrect place.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Viejito bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

No-one is forcing you lot to mail comments in this thread.

No ane is forcing you to rant and rave in this forum. If y'all just desire to speak to the CEO, y'all can send him Flickrmail here.

Good night, sir. I am going to bed.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

Nionyn_:

If that is non practiced plenty for you I fail to understand why you have posted here at all.

Why are yous posting here?

Are you required to postal service replies to every unmarried Help Forum thread? No, you're not. And then I'll ask again: why are you posting replies to a thread that does not concern you in any way?
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Nionyn_ bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Why are you posting here?

Are you required to post replies to every unmarried Help Forum thread? No, you're non. And so I'll ask again: why are you lot posting replies to a thread that does not business you in any way?

What on earth are you on well-nigh?

I don't reply to even the tiniest fraction of posts here, let solitary every thread.

As already suggested, if you want replies simply from Flickr staff you would be well brash to contact them directly (see the link already provided).
Otherwise you are airing your 'problem' with - and simply with - other Flickr members.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

ShellyS bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Why are you posting here?

Are you required to mail service replies to every single Help Forum thread? No, you're non. So I'll enquire again: why are you posting replies to a thread that does not business concern you lot in whatsoever fashion?

The Aid Forum is for users. Anyone can raise an issue, and anyone on flickr can and will answer. That's how the HF works. Mostly, users offering resolutions to problems, try to troubleshoot, and oftentimes go off on tangents, philosophical or otherwise. Flickr staff does look at the HF discussions and join in as they see fit. But if y'all want to direct your problems merely with flickr staff, y'all would practice best by using the Aid Form, rather than mail in a forum where anyone on flickr can and will answer. Telling folks they shouldn't answer will non deter well-nigh folks here and will ofttimes bring others of u.s. out of reading way to put in our own two cents. And so, this is my two cents.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

ShellyS:

Mostly, users offer resolutions to issues, endeavor to troubleshoot, and oft go off on tangents, philosophical or otherwise.

Yes, when that is possible.

Withal, the outcome I had raised here in my original post cannot exist solved past volunteer posts. Information technology's a technical issue that involves changes to the Flickr site. In other words, it'due south technically complicated, it requires changes to Flickr's pricing model, and it requires the involvement of many Flickr folks. I do not expect to receive an answer from Flickr - one manner or another - anytime soon, as measured in days.

Which is why, for this detail issue, all this noisy input from all these allegedly well-meaning volunteers is neither useful nor needed. It is, however, thoroughly baffling.

Flickr staff does look at the HF discussions and bring together in as they see fit.

And that is precisely whom I was aiming for. Thanks for confirming that Flickr Staff does read the HF threads, which is what I had suspected all along.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

ShellyS bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

However, the event I had raised here in my original mail service cannot be solved by volunteer posts.

That's not the signal. You posted something you desire flickr to offer. You could have posted nearly annihilation. People are going to respond. That's what they do in the HF. They answer, they offering opinions, they discuss options or lack of same. Yes, maybe yous'll get lucky and one of flickr's back up heroes will popular in. They might advise sending them a message, or to mail in a different thread, or maybe, if you become lucky, they'll say they'll laissez passer on the request to the college-ups. That still won't hateful other people won't proceed commenting. The merely way that happens is if folks get bored or staff closes the thread.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

ShellyS:

People are going to answer.

Why?

What is the indicate of inserting oneself into a purely technical problem that one cannot perchance offering any real solution to? Doing so is not helpful.

If Flickr decides to implement my request, great. They'll get my money next year. If not, they won't. Information technology'south entirely up to Flickr - and only up to Flickr - whether they'll go along to go my money. No volunteer input needed.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Marta "999 Photos" Wojtkowska bilang:

ShellyS:

volition frequently bring others of us out of reading style to put in our own two cents.

I am being tempted... ;) Thanks!
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Why?

Why are You posting in a public Help Forum which, also staff, everyone else in the whole earth with an Net connection can read?

IF your mail service was purely meant for Flickr staff y'all could have clicked on the Help link in the footer or under our round buddy icon top right to and so observe this grade for contacting staff directly;:

assistance.flickr.com/contact

Instead you chose to circulate your dissatisfaction with an existing situation in a Help Forum which is primarily a user-to-user forum (equally it says top left on the offset page), thus you are in fact directly addressing the entire Flickr community; now you are not going to tell me yous had never expected fellow members to non answer, come on. The more so since your OP is, shall we say slightly provocative and an open invitation for members to postal service responses.
IF you had not alreadly realized that (?), at present is the time.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Walwyn bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

I accept a number of loftier-res composite photos that I cannot upload to Flickr simply considering they are larger than 200MB in size. And that's with a Pro business relationship.

I accept a large number of PSD/TIFF files that are around 500Mb because the contain multiple layers, sometimes with several variants of a final image. I don't expect flickr to handle those files that is what Amazon Prime photos is for.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

kh1234567890 bilang:

bluerubberoctopus:

While the documented limit is 200M, it's actually significantly smaller than that in terms of what size jpg is immune. When I was doing a lot of large format photography, and scanning 4x5 and 8x10 negatives, I would striking the (undocumented, lower) limit. I opened a case and was told "200M is the maximum uncompressed size"

Flickr has to decompress the epitome file to generate the set of smaller size 'thumbnails'. I suspect that the limit is ready by whatever software does this.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

The Due north West Of Nowhere bilang:

I sincerely can wrap my head effectually this. Flickr won't show that epitome at that quality ever. Nor volition whatever other site.

Information technology's surreal. Only those wishing to download the original image volition go to see information technology and, for most users, there is no difference in quality from a certain bespeak on.

You accept your right to protest, just this is a chip beyond reasonable as of today's standards.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

ShellyS bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

People are going to reply.

Why?

Because that's what people do. I've been on a lot of message boards and forums for a long time now, from AOL MBs, usenet, and Yahoo Groups, to today's social media sites, and the one constant is that people will respond to posts. It's built into the product and information technology's human nature. If you lot don't want to run into the responses, just scroll past and keep an eye out for names with "staff" nether them.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

MabelAmber️®***Pluto5339*** incognito:

at present you are not going to tell me you had never expected fellow members to non respond, come on

I never said I didn't wait members to reply.

I said I did not - and still do not - understand why some members - such as yourself - feel compelled to respond when they have zippo useful to offer, and they tin can't do anything near my request anyhow.

Case in point, your latest post.

Merely considering yous can post a reply in a thread, it doesn't necessarily mean yous ever should.

Please cease. Null that you have posted in this entire thread has been helpful, or fifty-fifty marginally useful.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

ShellyS bilang:

Marta "999 Photos" Wojtkowska:

ShellyS:
will oft bring others of usa out of reading mode to put in our own two cents.
I am being tempted... ;) Thanks!

You're welcome. :) I resisted for nearly of yesterday, until I just couldn't, anymore.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

MabelAmber***Pluto5339***MysteryGuest bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

I never said I didn't expect members to reply.

Actually you did, here:

No volunteer input needed.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Coyoty bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

The whole purpose of this forum is for other users to respond to your issues and offering solutions. It states that earlier yous contribute to it. It does not guarantee you lot will like the responses. Past posting in this forum, you lot specifically invite other users to answer. Invitation is not coercion. People here are doing what you lot asked them to. If y'all did non understand that from all the signs around yous, and then information technology's on you, not them. Of grade they will object to your slapping their hands abroad and saying, "Not similar that!"

We empathise you have bug. But if you found yourself hither and continually say nothing'south being done when you mean zip you like is existence done, then our conclusions will be that yous're really hither for the attention, non the assist.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Viejito bilang:

Stefan Teleman:

Naught that you take posted in this entire thread has been helpful,

Not for lack of trying. It is just that some people are beyond help.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

Stefan Teleman bilang:

Coyoty:

The whole purpose of this forum is for other users to respond to your issues and offer solutions.

None of that has happened, thus far.

What has been offered here are personal opinions, stupid comments entirely unrelated to my original post, and incoherent rants.

These have zero value.

I understand that most of y'all believe that whatever it is that you are writing here is inherently valuable. I am here to tell you that is non the case.

If you practice non piece of work for Flickr, and you are not in a position of providing an authoritative respond to the issues I had raised in my original post, please stop posting in this thread.
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

katie_ko bilang:

Thank you to those attempting friendly & effective input towards the OP.

Stefan Teleman:
As others have mentioned, the Help Forum is a medium for the Flickr community to engage with one another.

While staff hang out here, the best identify to have a 1:one with our team is going to be through the contact us form.

It seems your original post was more of "feature request" than a question or invitation for word-- every bit this place is intended.

In this case, shooting us a message hither is going to be the best thought and then we can direct information technology to our Production Development squad then we can go it on record as a formal request.

Thanks!
Di-posting pada 28 bulan yang lalu. ( permalink )

ealesscontel.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157712528614857/

Share this post