![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Equipment Gadgets, mobile networking, cameras, weather stations, software, and more. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,672
|
Where is the best place to store a large collection of photos at full resolution? For free.
I have about 700 wedding photos that I would like to get online fairly quickly at full resolution. Total size is around 3.1gb. I'm not too concerned about them getting stolen, as I would like friends and family to be able to view and print them if they choose. Considering the large quantity it would also help if they had a good upload program. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Stormtrack Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 1,916
|
flickr maybe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 1,212
|
Flickr, but it's not for free if you want to store that many. That said, if you can't put out $25 a year unlimited for multi-location offsite protected data storage, then online photo hosting probably isn't for you.
__________________
Ryan McGinnis http://bigstormpicture.com VORTEX-2 image licensing at vortex-2.com Stock Photography at Getty |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 181
|
Ryan, do you have any recommendations for that $25 a year site for unlimited data backup?
__________________
The views and opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,672
|
What about Fotki?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 511
|
I use iPhoto but most of you don't use Macs. Before I go further please tell us
(1) resolution of the photos (2) kind of camera you use (3) do you also have a hard drive backup or ? Shutterfly is not too bad http://www.shutterfly.com ::: Quote:
__________________
Dr.Eric Flescher(kcstormguy@aol.com):Storm Satori blog : E.O.A.S.(Earth,Oceans, Atmosphere & Space) blog: Account/Photos of Kirksville, MO tornado 5/13/2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Saltillo, MS
Posts: 466
|
i dont know any site thats going to give you 3.1 GB of storage...
i assumed this thread was about free-online photo storage...i have always used photobucket, some people use flicker... i have well over 170 photos on my photobucket account, and i wonder if there even is a limit... like i said, as far as large size photos...i have no idea...
__________________
Terry Tyler 2009 - http://midsouthchaser.xanga.com/ North Mississippi's Independent Storm Chaser |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,672
|
I'm not worried about backup or hard drive storage. I'm looking to get these photos online so friends and family can view and print them at their discretion.
Each photo is about 4-7mb in size. I know Picasa gives you 2gb of storage at whatever resolution you want. I also think I could trim about 50% of these photos out of the mix. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Stormtrack Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 923
|
Is it necessary to store the photos at full resolution online? I'd resize them down to screen resolution and compress them modestly. You don't have to go down to 400x300 web resolution, but your friends aren't going to download 3.1 GB of images in their spare time. Heck, asking them to download a few 7MB images is asking a lot. Resize them down to 1280x1024 or 1024x768. Otherwise you are going to get complains that images don't fit on the screen, are stretched and distorted, or take too long to download.
If you need them full resolution, then going the freeloaders route is probably not a good idea. 3.1 GB of data takes a long time to download anywhere, but I can only imagine how long it will take on a free data storage site. Drop a few bucks on a hosting company that will give you several gig of web storage on your own domain name. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,672
|
Quote:
No, my friends aren't going to download 3.1gb of data. They are likely going to look at modest sized thumbnails and only download the 3 or 4 full sized photos they want to print. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|