benefits of Flickr??

Hi,
Sorry if there is already a thread like this, I did a search but couldn't find what I was looking for. But please do point me in the right direction if a thread already exists.
I don't upload any of my images to websites (other then a few in forums) and I'm wondering a few things that maybe some of you can help me with.

Why use websites like flickr? what are the advantages and disadvantages?

How does it work? What is the difference between the free accounts and the ones you pay for?

Are images "safe" or can people take them as they please without my permission? (Thats something that really bothers me, I don't mind sharing my images, as long as I'm asked first).

What do all the different licences mean?

Is there other website like flickr that are better?

Or anything else I should know about?

I'm just unsure whether to create an account, so sorry if these questions seem.... like they should be common sense, I've just not done anything like this, so don't know whats involved or if it's worth it.
Thanks.

A lot of these questions are answered on Flickr...I suggest you take a read through there first.

Straight from Flickr

Flickr is not safe. Anyone can download any of your images even if you disable downloading and protect them. Best bet is to use a good watermark.

Flickr pro is a good deal for what you get. It is not expensive at all. I use a free Flickr account and when I need anything more I have a premium Zenfolio account. Some people use a site called 500px ( I have no experience with it ).

Just make a free account and see what you think of it If you are like me and hate making more accounts, you can just login with a google account or even your facebook account.

Thanks Lowrider and ratjack, just trying to navigate my way around on flickr. How protected are the images?
Plus curious of other peoples experience.

Macro girl wrote in post #15853961
How protected are the images?

Anything posted on the internet can be downloaded/copied. If you are that worried about similar happening to your images, don't post them on the internet.

Macro girl wrote in post #15853961
Thanks Lowrider and ratjack, just trying to navigate my way around on flickr. How protected are the images?
Plus curious of other peoples experience.

If someone really wants to download your images they can look at source code and pull the image from that. If you put a good watermark on it though, they will not be able to do anything with it and therefore will not waste their time downloading it

Thanks, I've done more searching and having a good looking around on flickr with lot's of reading. I think I've answered all my questions with what I've come across. So thanks to those who took the time to reply. I don't think a flickr account is for me at the moment, as my images are already organised on my PC.... etc.

A service such as Flickr is geared towards sharing images with a wide public audience. Very inexpensive for what you get, and it takes all the real management issues of having your own personal website hosted somewhere off your hands. No need to worry about a whole host of major issues that can be the difference between a successful website that many people enjoy, and a computer that has been turned into a "zombie" and is piping put spam email.

They're not designed for really backing up the images or for personal storage, but rather stuff that you are sharing with people and aren't worried about who else is viewing it. (I haven't really played with the private settings, but they don't look exceptionally secure or convenient to use.) I have my Flickr tied into my Lightroom setup, so tossing up photos is a breeze.

I also have my Fliker account set up on LR which makes keeping everything up to date very simple. If I do alterations to an image it is automatically set to re-upload. You can have LR manage groups of images, and LR will use it's smart collection technology to auto manage them for you. In an effort to reduce the utility of the images to others I stick pretty much to the POTN 1024 px on the longest edge, but have a fixed compression level of 80% for maximum quality. All the images have the copyright info in the EXIF as well as set within Fliker. They also have a small copyright notice in the lower left corner.

If someone wants to down load it as a desktop image well it is not really going to bother me. If someone else uses it without permission then I will take appropriate action. My only real issue is with Pinterest, as they re-host images without authority, rather than linking. With a linked image you at least have the control to maintain the image at the link address or remove the image and break the link. My view that Pinterest should be using an opt in system rather than the current opt out that they have. Is there an easy way to search Pinterest for your own images (which I understand can end up posted without even the correct atribution) without signing up for an account?

Alan

Macro girl wrote in post #15854105
Thanks, I've done more searching and having a good looking around on flickr with lot's of reading. I think I've answered all my questions with what I've come across. So thanks to those who took the time to reply. I don't think a flickr account is for me at the moment, as my images are already organised on my PC.... etc.

Flickr is also used to post pics and to participate in groups like "strobist", lighting, gear, etc.

Thanks for the info from you all, I'm just not sure whether it's worth setting up and having something else that I need to keep organised.

watt100 wrote in post #15857634
Flickr is also used to post pics and to participate in groups like "strobist", lighting, gear, etc.

This was partly why I was looking into it. I posted images here in the critique forum and by having to resize my images to post, I had lost some sharpness, so my area of focus didn't look to be in the right spot, but I couldn't show a larger photo to show it was actually correct. By having to resize so small doesn't always show an accurate photo to get proper feed back.

It's not that safe, best bet is to use a reasonably good watermark so it will act as a deterrent to those who want to use them w/o permission, or at least most

Macro girl wrote in post #15857815
Thanks for the info from you all, I'm just not sure whether it's worth setting up and having something else that I need to keep organised.

This was partly why I was looking into it. I posted images here in the critique forum and by having to resize my images to post, I had lost some sharpness, so my area of focus didn't look to be in the right spot, but I couldn't show a larger photo to show it was actually correct. By having to resize so small doesn't always show an accurate photo to get proper feed back.

A picture doesn't need to be at its original resolution for someone to enjoy it, in fact, no one wants to see that ,except pixel peepers. You should resize your images before you bring them to the web. Anywhere between 500 and 1024 pixels on the longest side is good, I do 800.

namtot wrote in post #15858955
A picture doesn't need to be at its original resolution for someone to enjoy it, in fact, no one wants to see that ,except pixel peepers. You should resize your images before you bring them to the web. Anywhere between 500 and 1024 pixels on the longest side is good, I do 800.

I've been uploading to facebook at 2048 long side for the last while, and other photographers who have switched to this as well agree there is a visible improvement.

I will toss full res up to my paid Flickr account if I'm basically releasing the image to share with friends and team members, and let Flickr handle resizing it on the fly.

Macro girl wrote in post #15857815
Thanks for the info from you all, I'm just not sure whether it's worth setting up and having something else that I need to keep organised.

This was partly why I was looking into it. I posted images here in the critique forum and by having to resize my images to post, I had lost some sharpness, so my area of focus didn't look to be in the right spot, but I couldn't show a larger photo to show it was actually correct. By having to resize so small doesn't always show an accurate photo to get proper feed back.

With Flickr (or photobucket, Webshots, 500px, etc.) you can post a photo with the link to the larger size