Yahoo CEO: " ...there is no such thing really as professional photographers"

[Overread]

Interesting tidbit: yahoo is planning to spend/ already spent 1/3 of its cash withholdings on Tumblr.

From what I've heard Tumblr was basically going to fall apart on its own as it proved so popular it cost too much to actually keep it up running in the near future (ergo the guy running it found himself way out of depth). I've also heard that they've no immediate plans to change anything- which I suspect is a way for them to take over - gain respect from the community for "not changing anything and running it smooth" and then suddenly bring out their own wave of changes

 

[jowensphoto]

Oh, sure. Isn't that how it usually works?

 

[Steve5D]

Honestly, if the CEO of Yahoo was in a position to solely determine the health and vitality of the photography industry, there might be cause for concern. Saving that, though, this is simply an example of someone who's stupid. Taking offense to her comments is not much less stupid...

I'm not going to get into it with you again, Steve.

Your constant ad hominem attacks and general negativity add little value to the forum.

I'll acknowledge that I might come across as negative when someone gets upset over something that will never, ever affect them.

But I'll certainly allow for the possibility that I'm wrong (however remote that possibility may be).

So, perhaps you could explain what the problem is.

Why do her comments offend you?

How do her comments affect you?

Given as it has you upset enough to watch an hour long video and then start a thread about it, perhaps you could be a bit more articulate as to what about it is so upsetting to you...

 

[Pallycow]

Flickr was "handy" but really nothing more than that. I'd like to think...and could be wrong...but true working professionals are going to have their own site they use for their portfolio anyway...so really this only affects the hobbyists...which I believe coincides with her comments.

 

[Steve5D]

More than anything, I use Flickr for hosting photos I want to post elsewhere...

 

[Overread]

Working pros HAD to have their own site because flickr's rules were such that you were not allowed to use your images hosted on their services for commercial gain/on commercial websites. It was always a website dedicated primarily for the hobbyist photographer. The "pro" thing was mostly just like how other companies like to call their better packages professional because it sounds nice.

 

[manaheim]

I must be the only person in the world who doesn't have a Flickr account.

Well, this is the same woman who declared last year that having a baby was WAY easier than everyone makes it out to be. LOL. Might be easy enough when you have unlimited funds to throw at daycares, nannies and such--but I still can't wait to see if she says the same thing about teenagers! :lmao:
Or until she has that SECOND child who is nothing LIKE the first. My first kid was "easy" too...laid back, slept through the night very early, rarely cried for no good reason...second kid? Not so much.

Anyway, her whole attitude with the baby thing caused her to lose any tiny bit of credibility I might have otherwise lent her anyway, so I don't really give a rat's patootie what she thinks about...well, about anything, really. I use flickr because I like how it works. When I stop liking how it works, I'll stop using it.

I do wonder, though: Since there are no professional photographers, wonder who she gets to take studio portraits of her son? Maybe she just picks a random flickr user from time to time? :lmao:

Let them eat cake!

 

[bentcountershaft]

If everyone here would just get over themselves for a second and accept the statement as is you might see the benefit of it. No more "What Defines a Pro" threads. When you think about it that way she's really doing us all a favor and we should thank her every week.

 

[TCampbell]

Flickr upset a lot of their Pro users with the way they handled the transition, but I noticed they backpedaled by the end of the day.

While everyone gets a free terrabyte, Pro users get to keep their "unlimited" space and other pro features (everything but the "pro" badge next to your name). But the condition was that (a) you had to have a pro account active AND it had to be set to auto-renew. If you didn't have pro it's too late to buy it (attractive to some because the only thing you get by paying $50/year is no ads... pro is $25/year and is no ads, unlimited space, and a few other features.)

But what REALLY ticked people off (at on all the comments I was following on Google+) was that if you weren't already set to auto-renew then your pro membership would expire normally and they wouldn't let you renew it. In an interesting post by Thomas Hawk, they gave away free "pro" certificates at a Photowalk and even paid pro accounts could use it to extend their pro membership. Anyone who took advantage of the free coupon ended up having to disable auto-renew, apply the certificate, and then remember to go back to being "paid" pro (rather than free/gifted pro) as their gift period came to a close. All those people learned they were basically being kicked to the curb with no way to get back in. They were NOT happy.

By the end of the day, Flickr had revised their FAQ and now state that as long as your "pro" membership was active as of midnight, May 20, then you can keep your pro membership (whether it was a free/gifted pro vs. paid pro and whether auto-renew was enabled or not.) HOWEVER... if you actually let it expire, then you're out.

If you are a paid pro user but you'd rather take advantage of the free account with ads (because, let's face it, it takes a LOT of photos to fill up 1TB) then they'll give you a refund (pro-rated refund) and revert you to a free member. They do make it clear that if you take the money and run then there's no going back (you can't change your mind.)

I think I found most of the rules here: Flickr: Help: Free Accounts, Upgrading and Gifts

 

[texkam]

with cameras as pervasive as they are, there is no such thing really as professional photographers,

Well, she's right. Just like there is no such thing really as professional graphic designers, with low cost computers and software, internet contests and third-world labor as pervasive as they are. Join the club chaps. Now excuse me while I get my pimply-face nephew to design my company's logo for $50. : /

 

[Ilovemycam]

Screw Yahoo. They deleted my account on Flickr after 9 days. I lost 190 images SCREW THEM...I use nothing Yahoo is I can help it. Now that they bot Tumblr I am waiting to see how they fudge it up.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Interesting tidbit: yahoo is planning to spend/ already spent 1/3 of its cash withholdings on Tumblr.

From what I've heard Tumblr was basically going to fall apart on its own as it proved so popular it cost too much to actually keep it up running in the near future (ergo the guy running it found himself way out of depth). I've also heard that they've no immediate plans to change anything- which I suspect is a way for them to take over - gain respect from the community for "not changing anything and running it smooth" and then suddenly bring out their own wave of changes

That could be true. Tumblr had poor cust service for the last few months when I asked questions. I had heard they get 80 to100 million posts a day. Most have pix attached. So it all costs $$.

Wouldn't it be something if we could run one of these photo forums like Tumblr? I'd be in photo forum heaven!

On Tumblr you have no worries. Say and post as you like.....FREEDOM TO BREATH!!!

 

[Ilovemycam]

Yahoo is more than Flickr...I'm sure they'll be fine. ;-)

I wouldn't be so sure about that. They've struggled mightily as a company for a long time. Only recently have they pulled themselves out of near extinction. So I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

They also seem to have a very poor track record as far as hiring CEO's that don't say/do stupid things.

https://www.google.com/finance?chdn...e&q=NASDAQ:YHOO&ntsp=0&ei=LdGbUamkNefniQLhuQE

Their search engine is poor.

 

[Ilovemycam]

flickr's interest in pandering to professional photographer is.. zero. Why on earth would they give a crap what some tiny group of non-customers would think?

Lots of pros moved over to 500, zen and other pro sites. They don't care much about flickr.

 

[Ilovemycam]

flickr's interest in pandering to professional photographer is.. zero. Why on earth would they give a crap what some tiny group of non-customers would think?

Do you have data to support this?

I have lots of friends who are part time/ full time pro's, who pay for and use FlickR Pro. Wouldn't the "paying money" thing be enough to consider these pros a "customer" of FlickR?

A lot of photogs had pro accounts that had crap for work. To me pro just meant large capacity storage.