Photobucket vs. Flickr

[Village Idiot]

The same image was uploaded to Photobucket and Flickr. Without looking at the properties, can you tell which one is hosted by which? Please vote in the poll for your selection, don't cheat, and if you do look at the properties, don't disclose which is which for at least the first 5 minutes.

1.

2.

I did this because I can tell when a photo is uploaded to photobucket. I've not once checked the properties of a photo that I suspected was uploaded to PB to find out that I was wrong. I want to see if it's me, or if there really is an image difference.

 

[mwcfarms]

I suspected the bottom was **********.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I can see a slight difference, and I guessed right.
But not enough difference to worry about it for web hosting photos to post here.
All those who "hate" PB, aren't doin it right.


...and, you stole my idea. F*****!

 

[Overread]

Did you upload at that size or did you upload the fullsize and have the sites downsize it? The latter is what many do and Photobucket tends to come off very poorly compared to flickr.

That said I guessed right as to which was which, but in this case it was a marginal difference.

However the real reasons to hate photobucket are the nasty terms and conditions; the messy appearance of the site and the ads - about its only bonus at present is that it gives you the photos url whilst flickr doesn't overtly give it to you -but it takes all of 3 seconds to grab with a right click of the mouse.

 

[Village Idiot]

1024 uploaded to each.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

the messy appearance of the site and the ads - about its only bonus at present is that it gives you the photos url whilst flickr doesn't overtly give it to you -but it takes all of 3 seconds to grab with a right click of the mouse.

Yeah, I wouldn't recommend photobucket as a gallery. I use it strictly for editing other people pictures, and hosting things that aren't Flickr worthy.

 

[NikonNewbie]

one isn't so bright...I got it

 

[Overread]

1024 uploaded to each.

Thought so - try doing fullsized ones and you'll see photobucket start to really underperform. My guess is that their resizing code just isn't as good and lacks any form of sharpening as well - compared to flickr which generally does a pretty good job of resizing.

Yeah, I wouldn't recommend photobucket as a gallery. I use it strictly for editing other people pictures, and hosting things that aren't Flickr worthy.

Aye I do much the same with mine - its also good for showing screenshots and other things not photography linked.

 

[KmH]

Who cares? :lmao:
Not all web browses are color aware. Not all computer diplays are calibrated. Laptop displays are notorious for being a crummy way to view images. That's not even accounting for all the people who view the internet almost exclusively on a cell phone screen.

 

[DerekMellott]

These were both uploaded full size and resized by the web service.

The op is correct, BIG difference here.....look at the eyes.

 

[mjhoward]

I actually think there's a very big difference in the original posts pics. The first one is MUCH richer in color. The second one looks like the saturation was dialed down to about 50%. The first pic is a bit sharper, but its not nearly as big of a difference as the color.

 

[eccs19]

I'm going to have to sign up for flicker. Surprised at the difference in both samples. Good eye opening thread Village.

 

[softball29]

I picked it right away, but being a fan of the one I picked, I realized what I was looking for. That's pretty wild though, the comparison that is.

 

[Village Idiot]

Who cares? :lmao:
Not all web browses are color aware. Not all computer diplays are calibrated. Laptop displays are notorious for being a crummy way to view images. That's not even accounting for all the people who view the internet almost exclusively on a cell phone screen.

It particularly matters for a photography website. If you can make people aware that Photobucket's compression degrades the image enough where it's visible, then you can recommend a provider that doesn't necessarily have these issues. That way, people will know where the problem is in their workflow that's causing the problem.

Along with that, all photobucket images that I've seen critiqued by users here have said that the person that posted the image had not sharpened them enough in post. That could have a person end up over sharpening in post to try an correct for photobucket's problems.