Join 3,372 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


What's a good site for hosting photos on?
June 7, 2011 7:35 AM   Subscribe

What's a good site for hosting photos on?

I'm sick of the annoyances that are found in typical image hosting sites. Ironically, I find that most "image hosting" sites work poorly for hosting images on and that sites that aren't meant for hosting images tend to fare better. Why?

1. Image-hosting sites tend to put an annoying ad in place of an image when an image has been moved/deleted (some people may like this but I strongly dislike it)
2. Image-hosting sites tend to limit your bandwidth.
3. Image-hosting sites tend to make your photos public to everyone.
4. Image-hosting sites tend to change your image's URL name (this is bad when it comes to SEO).

I used to upload images to the "Media" section on my WordPress blog but I suspect that WordPress doesn't like you hosting too many images because they shut my account down. I assume that it's because I hosted and embedded tons of images on many sites and that the fairly large amounts of bandwidth I was sucking up may have been a problem.

WordPress was ideal for me, but I'm now trying to find something that works as great as WordPress when it comes to hosting images.

Things I want in an image host:

. A big amount of storage (3 GB or so minimum)
. I want to be able to post pics which contain gore/nudity (not that this is what I plan on hosting, but I don't want my pics to be exposed to the public like they are on on ImageShack and PhotoBucket and get deleted. I want my pics to be private to everyone but the person I give a link to and the sites I embed the images on)
. I want to be able to post pics that are in various formats (at least JPEG, PNG and GIF support)
. I want to be able to post pics that are up to 20 MB in size or higher
. The host must not change the name of my pic (hyphens and lower-case letters are fine though)
. Unlimited bandwidth

What would fit the bill?

If I'd have to pay for an image-hosting service that meets that criteria it would be fine, but I'd rather use something free (obviously). I also want to you to note that I'm not a photographer and don't really need to use a service that caters mostly to professional photographers.

Thanks.
posted by GlassHeart to Computers & Internet (10 answers total) 4 users marked this as a favorite
 
DropBox sounds perfect for you. You can push your free hosting amount up past 3GB by getting people to sign up to dropbox off a referral link.

explanation of how to use public links.
posted by seanyboy at 7:38 AM on June 7, 2011


Image-hosting sites tend to change your image's URL name (this is bad when it comes to SEO).

You want your pictures to be private but you're concerned about SEO?

Does not compute.
posted by toomuchpete at 7:44 AM on June 7, 2011 [4 favorites]


Dropbox sounds like a good fit, but they do have a bandwidth limit for public links.

My very tech-savvy brother uses smugmug - here are their plans. I can't tell if they keep the original file name.
posted by exogenous at 7:45 AM on June 7, 2011 [1 favorite]


Smugmug allows you to use the original file name as the picture title, but does not preserve the original file name in the URL.

Also it doesn't meet your nudity criterion. From the TOS: "[Y]ou agree not to post, transmit or otherwise publish through the Site any of the following: ... User Content containing nudity that would be unacceptable in a public museum where minors visit...."
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:55 AM on June 7, 2011


If Wordpress is perfect, buy a $50 a year hosting account somewhere, install Wordpress and the photo library extension of you choice, and go to it. I don't think any commercial photo hosting service is going to meet all your requirements.
posted by COD at 7:57 AM on June 7, 2011


If Dropbox is too limiting for you, you could just upload them to Amazon S3, which is a very inexpensive place to host stuff: http://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/
posted by Magnakai at 9:15 AM on June 7, 2011 [1 favorite]


uhhhh.... PhotoBucket only has your images available to the public if you make them so. you can make them private.
posted by zombieApoc at 11:18 AM on June 7, 2011


Also, you're asking a lot for a service that is free. if you want to have a service that fits your criteria of unlimited bandwidth, > 3GB storage and allow you to store whatever you want then you're going to have to pay up.
posted by zombieApoc at 11:21 AM on June 7, 2011


Moreover, the inclusion of potentially offensive material will rule out some web hosts. Check the terms of service very carefully and be up front with salespeople about the nature of your content and see what they will and will not agree to. If you're not a photographer, and you post many photos, then it's possible that another factor against you is copyright troubles and DMCA takedown notices.

Your requirements are a minefield of trouble - high bandwidth, obscenity, copyright troubles. I suspect what you need is an overseas dedicated webserver with a no questions asked policy.

As you have learned, if you use a free service for this, you will not last long on that service, justifiably so. You are extracting maximum value for yourself, and giving headaches to the service.

If you find all this promised by a free service, that service itself will not last long.

You may be interested in investigating free speech type hosting, which may be able to point you toward hosts which will work better for you.
posted by artlung at 11:43 AM on June 7, 2011


Lastly, once you find that host that is ready for your needs, listen to COD: install WordPress yourself and you're off and running.
posted by artlung at 11:45 AM on June 7, 2011


« Older Weinergate wonderings: Can a p...   |  YANMD, but MD(ermatologist) ca... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.