Originally Posted by
.:Chris:.
PHOTOBUCKET:
I disagree here. If I didn't care about image quality I'd use a P&S camera. I don't know why everyone makes refrence to the fact that "[we] are not professional photographers." I take my hobbies seriously, don't you? Photobucket negates any sharpening that has been done in photoshop and then some. I do agree that $25 is more than reasonable. That's $2 per month, or two quarters a week... less than a cheeseburger at McDonalds.
I'm not saying you shouldn't have a backup plan. Sometimes I just wanna uplaod a picture, not go through sorting albums, describing photos, tagging, etc. Photobucket is the best one to use if you wanna go quick. There's always a compromise.
Originally Posted by
.:Chris:.
Flickr:
Sorry to pick your post apart, but I disagree here too. They've got image quality advantages over most of the competition, but they're geared too much towards their internal community for me to really consider them for hosting per se. I do, however, search their images and read through discussions daily. It's a great resource.
Thats a matter of opinion I guess. I personally like the strong internal community. It's a great way to meet people and study other techniques.
Originally Posted by
.:Chris:.
SmugMug:
SmugMug is great for people willing to pay. I dislike the fact that even when you register a domain, your webpage ends up being displayed via their URL (yourdomain.smugmug.com). I'm paying for their service, I shouldn't have to advertise for them too. Their layouts are great for people that don't have the ability to create someting completely unique, but you can usually tell when you're looking at a smugmug page - if you want to stand out from the crowd I don't think this is the way to do it.
I do really enjoy this hobby of mine, but I don't wanna have to pay anymore than I already have (camera & equipment) to go out and take pictures... at least not yet.