Good hosting site ?

norris_watkins · Sep 6, 2008

Hi I have been using google photos ( picasaweb ) till now to host/share my pictures.
But recently I started feeling that they are not doing a good job in presenting the pictures ( It looks much better when I look at them using Windows Photo gallery )
I was wondering if this is true
and if yes which one would you recommend for showing pictures at good quality.
Im willing to pay by the way
Thanks

Bifurcator · Sep 6, 2008

Ya know, something that everyone seems to overlook is the fact that you can run a server on a cheap-o $200 PC stuck under your desk and host your own files. I do that allot and it works fabulously. If you're already paying for even a moderately speedy connection and your gear is full duplex it's like having a free host that won't cut into you browsing performance at all and that YOU have full control over. It will kick your electric bill up about $5 to $8 a month but that's no biggy. I leave my 8-core mac on 24/7 for this reason among others - it's a huge system (drives and ram) but I almost don't notice it on the electric bill.

Another option I see everyone overlooking is the space that comes with your ISP service. I dunno about the USA but in Japan 99.99% of all ISPs offer between 5 and 100 gigs of storage free with your service. It's accessible via HTTP and FTP and also usually telnet too. I never see Americans hosting their own stuff... it's such a waste.

norris_watkins · Sep 6, 2008

I was considering that forawhile.
I have the Hp windows Homeserver just for that.
But the problem is that your internet upload speed is very low compared to teh download speed.
Not just that the download speed will be badly affacted if you are uploading something from another computer ( I dont know how that happens, But it definitely does )

And finally even if you host a site, what we need is a good software that will present teh user with great images. Afterall I dont have any problem with the hosting part of google - its just teh quality of the picture I see, that pips me

Alexis · Sep 7, 2008

Why not just get your own site and host it some where? There are some great photo album templates at TemplateMonster.com and other places, I hope that helps.

Joves · Sep 7, 2008

I use http://smugmug.com if you go with the power user account you get free RAW storage if you shoot that way. I use this as my fourth back up for my images, since I get unlimited storage space.

davidfromoz · Sep 7, 2008

I'll second smugmug.

It all depends on what you want of course. When I started my search, I didn't want to hassle with low limits on how many photos I could store, I didn't want to pay too much money, and I didn't want to be too worried that a photo of mine posted to a blog that suddenly because popular didn't shut down access to my photos due to bandwidth.

I couldn't find a free service. I was tempted to host it myself but decided that if bandwidth on a photo suddenly became high it might screw up photo access and even access to my site. In the end I got a basic smugmug account and haven't regretted it for a second. Its reliable, service is great and I never ever have to think or worry about it.

cheers,
david

Bifurcator · Sep 8, 2008

norris_watkins said:
I was considering that forawhile.
I have the Hp windows Homeserver just for that.
But the problem is that your internet upload speed is very low compared to teh download speed.

Well how many people do you expect to serve all at once? If it's only 3 to 5 at a time then it should be fast enough for them (by American speeds).

I live in Japan and I get a full 120 megabits upload speed AND the full 120 megabits download speed all at the same time. The comapny I'm using right now limits only torrents uploads

so I only get 20 megabits average upload to any one torrent but it spikes and drops from 0 to the full 120. They charge about $30 a month or something I forget.

Not just that the download speed will be badly affacted if you are uploading something from another computer ( I dont know how that happens, But it definitely does )

If your ISP offers full duplex service and your router and HUB are full duplex then upload speed/use should not affect download speed/use at all. Connection chatter makes a difference but that shouldn't be noticeable until you're up around a thousand or more connections.

If your ISP doesn't offer full duplex I wonder how much they charge for a second line into your home? So you have two internet connection. I think a connection is about the same cost per month as a hosting site isn't it? With a second line you can use it as you like too! Later you can bridge the connections and double its capacity! :thumbup:

And finally even if you host a site, what we need is a good software that will present teh user with great images. Afterall I dont have any problem with the hosting part of google - its just teh quality of the picture I see, that pips me

Umm, the reason some services like google or photobucket don't serve "great images" is that they filter and/or recompress the images. If you're running your own server that will never happen. At least I've never seen nor heard of a server app FTP or HTTP that messes with the data at all. So what you save on disk is what gets sent. If you run LINUX of some kind Apache is a great HTTP server and there are thousands (perhaps even millions) of free page templates that will display slide shows and navigable thumbnail pages.