A safe alternative to Photo Bucket

[keithgh]

I am being asked what is a suitable alternative provider to Photo Bucket if the member does not want to pay them?

What are you recommending to your members when asked the same question re posting Photos?

Why are you recommending these posts?

Keith

 

[Kirby]

I always recommend to use attachments, this is the only way to assure that the content will always be available.

 

[Kintaro]

xenforo attachments system

 

[agison]

Yup, Attachments

 

[Bread]

Attachments or something like Imgur or Dropbox.

 

[keithgh]

Are you referring to the Attach files in the post replies like I have just posted.

Keith

 

[Kintaro]

Are you referring to the Attach files in the post replies like I have just posted.

exactly

 

[keithgh]

Thank you all
Problem solved fast.

Keith

 

[Chromaniac]

Imgur is the only third party system that has survived for so long. Their latest UI makes it hard to get access to the BBCODE so that's a small problem for people who do not understand how BBCODE works.

 

[Alpha1]

Sooner or later almost all sites and services die. Relying on an external sites will inevitably cause problems down the road. Bandwidth should no longer be an issue as you can just use CDN.

 

[rainmotorsports]

Imgur is probably the safest for now. It's always hard to see where things are going. Reddit isn't going to allow imgur to go full on photo bucket. But there is always the chance they limited free hosting to sites within the company?

 

[Jeremy P]

Imgur isn't owned by Reddit, and Reddit actually rolled out their own internal image hosting platform last year because they were dissatisfied with the direction Imgur was taking. In trying to become profitable, Imgur had launched their own comment sub-communities (akin to Reddit) and were redirecting direct image links to web pages where they could display advertisements. You can't really blame them for trying to stay afloat, but as others have said, the only truly safe place to store images is internally (via attachments).

 

[rainmotorsports]

Imgur isn't owned by Reddit, and Reddit actually rolled out their own internal image hosting platform last year because they were dissatisfied with the direction Imgur was taking. In trying to become profitable, Imgur had launched their own comment sub-communities (akin to Reddit) and were redirecting direct image links to web pages where they could display advertisements. You can't really blame them for trying to stay afloat, but as others have said, the only truly safe place to store images is internally (via attachments).

Well there goes that lol. Someone start the death clock on that. There is no profit in free image hosting. There has to be another trick up your sleeve and advertising generates zero revenue for forum and other hosting.

 

[m1ne]

My image host has been online for 7 years. https://gfxf.net/
Really nice features and options available to registered users.

 

[Alpha1]

Photobucket has been online for 14 years, before they changed their terms and shut off service.

 

[m1ne]

Photobucket has been online for 14 years, before they changed their terms and shut off service.

That's money grabbing companies for you.

 

[Alpha1]

Well, do any other companies exist than money grabbing companies and companies waiting to grab money?
They need to keep the lights on in some way.

 

[Mr Lucky]

Plenty of rumours that Soundcloud is going the same way.

But of course nobody should expect a free service.

 

[rainmotorsports]

That's money grabbing companies for you.

Well the issue is someone has to pay that bandwidth bill. Small advertising wasn't doing it and even flooding the pages with ads and starting up paid services weren't either. They COULD. But when users are embedding the images there is no revenue from it. If it gets unbalanced to the point where there isn't enough revenue to cover hardware and bandwidth. You don't have to be money grabbing to go that direction.

I used to host servers for android firmware leaks and when it got into the Terabytes per minute range I bowed the hell out.

 

[m1ne]

Well the issue is someone has to pay that bandwidth bill. Small advertising wasn't doing it and even flooding the pages with ads and starting up paid services weren't either. They COULD. But when users are embedding the images there is no revenue from it. If it gets unbalanced to the point where there isn't enough revenue to cover hardware and bandwidth. You don't have to be money grabbing to go that direction.

I used to host servers for android firmware leaks and when it got into the Terabytes per minute range I bowed the hell out.

This isn't about revenue for me. I have an image host for myself really because I don't like any others. I just allow others to use it if they find it. A few extra people uploading images is not breaking the bank. Besides, I have the most to lose by closing down. Thousands of my own images are hosted there.