Please sign up or log in for the best forum experience!

    Pages: 1

layzee Feb 25, 2017

I swear to Science, Photobucket is the laggiest, slowest, most memory-hogging website I've had the misfortune of using.

The site visual interface looks fairly clean and neat (apart from the ads), but it still insists on downloading 5MB per page reload/refresh. Photobucket is the epitome of website bloat (the eBay site a close second).

It appends the "~original" to the URL of every image you upload (e.g. example.jpg~original) which looks retarded and to be honest, I'm still not sure what it's supposed to be for. Though I know it's something to do with viewing the image in its original size which raises the question "How about you just don't F around with my images, Photo*uckIt? I upload, you host. End of transaction. Capisce?"

Uploading images in batch (e.g. more than 10 at a time) is a struggle. First, the usual slowness. Then the progress bar will proceed to "15 images out of 10 uploaded"... wtf? Wait a while, and it will say image upload completed... except a few images slip through the gaps and fail to upload so you have to go through and check exactly which ones.

Viewing images as a viewer, is irrational and incomprehensible. So you upload an image and want to share it. "SHARE THIS PHOTO" the heading says. "Direct" the sub-heading says.

" … g~original"

Using my powers of logic and deduction, I conclude that this should be a direct link to the full size image.

Let's try it: … e.jpg.html

Why the F did you convert it to a html page. Why the F is the image small looking. Let's click on the magnifying glass icon... the image is now larger... but why the F is it STILL not the original size!?

I've just about had it with PhotoBucket's BS. I put up with it so long because:

1) They used to be good (years ago).
2) I've been with them a long time, so I've been with them a long time (i.e. can't be bothered changing/too much hassle to change e.g. fixing up/updating image URL links)
3) They were better than the alternatives, the last time I looked for alternatives (e.g. Imageshack didn't have the features I needed, plus they went to sh!t anyway).
4) I only needed one PhotoBucket feature: Upload in bulk, and with one click of a button, I can get a bunch of useful code (I mainly use the first two):

Direct link image URLs: … g~original … g~original … g~original

HTML thumb code (for websites e.g. eBay item description):
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image01.jpg" style=""></a>
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image02.jpg" style=""></a>
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image03.jpg" style=""></a>

HTML code (for websites e.g. eBay item description):
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image01.jpg"/></a>
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image02.jpg"/></a>
<a href="" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt=" photo image03.jpg"/></a>

IMG code (for Internet forums):

IMG thumb code (for Internet forums):

I don't ask for much. I upload images in bulk, website hosts them, and hands me the code I need to use the images. Simple. You used to be able to automatically get code for only the batch of new images you uploaded but that feature got removed since the PhotoBucket website redesign years ago. Parallels again to eBay here: website designers or whom it may concern trying to justify their salary. How about don't redesign the website. How about F off. It's perfectly good the way it is (was).

Any good alternatives out there that is suitable? Preferably not some short-term fly-by-nighter website. One that has been around for a long while and will continue to do so.

imgur seems to be one of the biggest names and has been around for a decent time (since 2009) while Photobucket has been existing since 2003. There seems to be online chatter about imgur being blocked from being used on eBay so that is a potential disadvantage.

jb Feb 25, 2017

I think this whole post could have done without the crazy ad hominem attacks against photobucket but if you're looking for alternatives, check gyazo or puush. I'd recommend dropbox, but they're removing the Public folder next month so generating public URLs will be a headache.

Rrolack Feb 25, 2017

If you're worried about a service being around for a long time, I'd bet on imgur over other sites you've never heard of.

vert1 Feb 25, 2017 (edited Feb 25, 2017)

I use imgur (mainly for gifs) and so far it is working out fine. It does have 14 small-time threats with the four parent threats being Adtech (spyware), CasaleMedia (marketing cookie), Media (regular cookies), and Servedby (spyware cookie).

My artistic friends use Flickr for hosting photography.

Alcahest Feb 25, 2017 (edited Feb 25, 2017)

"Parallels again to eBay here: website designers or whom it may concern trying to justify their salary. How about don't redesign the website. How about F off. It's perfectly good the way it is (was)."
And yeah imgur, no-brainer.

layzee Feb 27, 2017

Just signed up for imgur. Clean no-lag site and easy to navigate. While it can generate HTML image links, it can't generate them with thumbnails. More importantly, it converts the file name of every image uploaded into a random 7 letter/number string. Not only does it look ugly, it makes image management a hassle (I have detailed image file names for a specific purpose) and so, this is a deal breaker. I think imgur is more of a "image sharing" (i.e. "social media") website than an image hosting site. I'm going to stick with the devil I know for now.

I'll check Dropbox (forgot if my account still exists, got it along with the Anki flashcard program) and Flickr later. gyazo and puush sounds more like screen capturing software though?

jb wrote:

crazy ad hominem attacks against photobucket

Off topic but an ad hominem attack is basically an attempt to indirectly attack a person's argument by attacking the character of the person instead of attacking the argument itself.

Here's an example:

Person A: I think we should lower corporate tax rates to improve the economy.
Person B: I think doing that does more harm than good because [insert reasoned argument here]. Therefore, we shouldn't.

Person A can now respond in two ways:

Response 1: Nah, you're wrong. I mean, you're just a burger-flipper. What can a person like you possibly know about economics anyway? Your argument is inherently invalid because of your status as a minimum wage slave. Now go make me my burger, pleb and leave the thinking to the adults.

This is an ad hominem attack - the attempt by Person A to weaken Person B's argument by attacking Person B's uhh, Person. What type of job Person B has, has nothing to do with the debate at hand. For all we know, Person B might have just got his economics degree and in the meantime, he's just trying to make ends meet (e.g. student debt) at McDonald's. Not that having an economics degree automatically make one's opinion right, of course, but I'd take more seriously Person B's opinion than Person A, who, in this hypothetical scenario, is merely parroting things he heard from 10 seconds of Fox News instead of actually coming to this conclusion from his own extensive research.

Response 2: Nuh-uh, you're wrong you stupid idiot. Go eat poop, you poopy-head.

This is not an ad hominem attack because there was no attempt to address Person B's argument. This is merely an attack. If I remember correctly (before it got deleted), I believe Ashley Winchester's post falls under this category (lol).

Anyway, all of these paragraphs are besides the point. Photobucket is not a person/human, it is a non-sentient website and websites can't talk so ad hominem doesn't really enter into it.

It would be more accurate to call my OP post a heat-of-the-moment, rage-fueled yet reasoned, tl;dr diatribe rant.

Board footer

Forums powered by FluxBB