Imageshack?

superluser · February 25, 2007, 12:34:59 AM

So I'm getting concerned that I might be running out of space on my ISP's servers, and I'm not sure if I want to host images and such on my web site, since I'm not sure what sort of bandwidth these forums pull down.

I was considering getting an account on imageshack, and paying full price to do it, when I discovered that they seem to be free.

How, exactly, can imageshack be free? What's the catch? Does anybody have any bad dealings with them, or should I just go ahead and start hosting images there?

xHaZxMaTx · February 25, 2007, 01:02:22 AM

I've found that Image Shack tends to be rather slow and is down quite a bit (compared to PhotoBucket) which is why I use PhotoBucket.

Photobucket has a 10GB monthly bandwidth standard, with 1GB of storage. I have just over 1,000 pictures and videos uploaded to my account right now, and I still have a way to go to fill it all up. That's including everything I've ever uploaded. I've never gone through to clean up - deleting old files and what not, it's all there from the very beginning, 2-3 years ago.

ITOS · February 25, 2007, 03:57:31 AM

I use Photobucket too. Never had any problems with it.

How they get money? There are some ads on their website and you can pay for a pro account.

Gabi · February 25, 2007, 08:33:21 AM

I use both. PhotoBucket makes it easier to group images in albums and doesn't rename the images, but ImageShack is better for Invisible Friend images as it doesn't reveal who they belong to, and you can upload files faster because you don't have to go through the login process. I think PhotoBucket used to resize all big images before, so I used ImageShack to host large images. I think that now it only resizes the ones you tell it to.

And yes, there are ads on the ImageShack website and you can pay for an account that will let you upload many images at once via a zip file, but I can live without that feature.

xHaZxMaTx · February 25, 2007, 11:17:00 AM

There was a time when PhotoBucket only allowed images smaller than 512KB and 800x800 pixels, but now you can upload anything under 1MB, regardless of dimensions. You can also have the image name scrambled upon uploading.

Aridas · February 25, 2007, 01:29:02 PM

imageshack went down, ever? That'd be news to me.

superluser · February 25, 2007, 02:01:45 PM

Quote from: Aridas Soulfire on February 25, 2007, 01:29:02 PMimageshack went down, ever? That'd be news to me.

Obviously, you've never been to Fark.

rt · February 25, 2007, 02:43:55 PM

You can also sign up for a free imageshack account and have a stable url and shack for images, IIRC. Other ways the images tend to wander off or you just loose the url.

Personally I'm used to seeing 'photoshop bandwidth exceeded' pictures quite a bit. I think IS has the same too.

Mabey you'll want some mirrors / duplicates depending on what you are doing. So try out both.

xHaZxMaTx · February 25, 2007, 03:15:42 PM

You mean PhotoBucket Bandwidth Exceeded?

Anyway, I've never exceeded my bandwidth. Even with 51,000 monthly hits, I'm only at 7% of my 10GB bandwidth.

rt · February 25, 2007, 05:13:48 PM

OMG Photoshop is out of bandwidth

Err yeh photo*bucket*

I'm guessing these are the free accounts then, can't tell you these are other people's images.

xHaZxMaTx · March 01, 2007, 09:12:46 PM

Whoops, reached my 1,000 file limit just now. Didn't know about that.