<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flickr Video Arrives&#8230; with Limitations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/</link>
	<description>Technology News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:26:55 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135462</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135462</guid>
		<description>How are you all missing the compression aspect? What formats/codecs/compression does Flickr video support? Depending on that, the 90-second limitation changes its meaning. Looking at the video above for instance, it either looks to be encoded in H.264 or maybe its uncompressed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How are you all missing the compression aspect? What formats/codecs/compression does Flickr video support? Depending on that, the 90-second limitation changes its meaning. Looking at the video above for instance, it either looks to be encoded in H.264 or maybe its uncompressed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135432</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:54:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135432</guid>
		<description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-135418&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;lp007 wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;Flickr Pro accounts are free if you use AT&amp;T/Yahoo as your ISP. This happened sometime last year — around the time I stopped using flickr. :roll&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
Really? That&#039;s actually a pretty sweet deal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-135418" rel="nofollow">lp007 wrote:</a><br />
<blockquote>Flickr Pro accounts are free if you use AT&amp;T/Yahoo as your ISP. This happened sometime last year — around the time I stopped using flickr. :roll</p></blockquote>
</div>
<p>Really? That&#8217;s actually a pretty sweet deal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashley</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135420</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135420</guid>
		<description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-135392&quot;&gt;Inferno_str1ke wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;I think the 90 second limit is a little strict, but 3 or 4 minutes would be fine - going up to 10 may mean split 3-part copyright violations. If they set a size limit you’d see badly encoded TV series popping up all over the place, though I guess an interesting thing is that if they’re only offering it for Pro accounts they could just insta-ban anyone who was found uploading copyrighted material.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
Ryan and I actually had a conversation about the point you just made yesterday. People who have a Flickr Pro account have it for a reason, and so if they violated Flickr&#039;s terms, they could easily lose their account and all of their photos like you mentioned, an insta-ban. Just knowing that you could lose your account if you posted copyrighted material would probably be enough to keep most users from doing it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-135392">Inferno_str1ke wrote:</a><br />
<blockquote>I think the 90 second limit is a little strict, but 3 or 4 minutes would be fine &#8211; going up to 10 may mean split 3-part copyright violations. If they set a size limit you’d see badly encoded TV series popping up all over the place, though I guess an interesting thing is that if they’re only offering it for Pro accounts they could just insta-ban anyone who was found uploading copyrighted material.</p></blockquote>
</div>
<p>Ryan and I actually had a conversation about the point you just made yesterday. People who have a Flickr Pro account have it for a reason, and so if they violated Flickr&#8217;s terms, they could easily lose their account and all of their photos like you mentioned, an insta-ban. Just knowing that you could lose your account if you posted copyrighted material would probably be enough to keep most users from doing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lp007</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135418</link>
		<dc:creator>lp007</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135418</guid>
		<description>Flickr Pro accounts are free if you use AT&amp;T/Yahoo as your ISP. This happened sometime last year --- around the time I stopped using flickr. :roll</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Flickr Pro accounts are free if you use AT&amp;T/Yahoo as your ISP. This happened sometime last year &#8212; around the time I stopped using flickr. :roll</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Inferno_str1ke</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135392</link>
		<dc:creator>Inferno_str1ke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135392</guid>
		<description>I think the 90 second limit is a little strict, but 3 or 4 minutes would be fine - going up to 10 may mean split 3-part copyright violations. If they set a size limit you&#039;d see badly encoded TV series popping up all over the place, though I guess an interesting thing is that if they&#039;re only offering it for Pro accounts they could just insta-ban anyone who was found uploading copyrighted material.

To be honest I was always skeptical about video on Flickr - they do photos so well that it seems a shame that their attention should be diverted - I&#039;d rather they brought in something like privacy options for tags. Nevertheless a lot of my albums do consist of videos at some point, and assuming I can split the longer ones it will be nice to have them included in the photostream for each set as it tells the story better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the 90 second limit is a little strict, but 3 or 4 minutes would be fine &#8211; going up to 10 may mean split 3-part copyright violations. If they set a size limit you&#8217;d see badly encoded TV series popping up all over the place, though I guess an interesting thing is that if they&#8217;re only offering it for Pro accounts they could just insta-ban anyone who was found uploading copyrighted material.</p>
<p>To be honest I was always skeptical about video on Flickr &#8211; they do photos so well that it seems a shame that their attention should be diverted &#8211; I&#8217;d rather they brought in something like privacy options for tags. Nevertheless a lot of my albums do consist of videos at some point, and assuming I can split the longer ones it will be nice to have them included in the photostream for each set as it tells the story better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135377</link>
		<dc:creator>Max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135377</guid>
		<description>I think 90 seconds is ridiculous. I have a point-and-shoot camera which allows me to make videos and a lot of my videos are like 3-4 minutes each. I think I&#039;ll still be able to upload those, but then only view the first 90 seconds (like regular users could upload as many photos as they want within their monthly limits, but only be able to view the last 200 uploaded). Obviously, some of them are a lot shorter and would make the cut with the 90 second limit, but it&#039;s still ridiculous. Pro users pay for Flickr so they could get unlimited uploading. Maybe they should have made a 90 second limit for regular users and unlimited for Pro users? This 90 seconds is bull. I&#039;m very disappointed with their decision. Maybe they should also change their photo upload limit to 1 MB per photo, because you know, it would be really artistic for someone to pull off a 3-exposure photo into an HDR photo with a 7-10 megapixel camera, and then be able to compress that into 1024 kB. //end rant &gt;:(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think 90 seconds is ridiculous. I have a point-and-shoot camera which allows me to make videos and a lot of my videos are like 3-4 minutes each. I think I&#8217;ll still be able to upload those, but then only view the first 90 seconds (like regular users could upload as many photos as they want within their monthly limits, but only be able to view the last 200 uploaded). Obviously, some of them are a lot shorter and would make the cut with the 90 second limit, but it&#8217;s still ridiculous. Pro users pay for Flickr so they could get unlimited uploading. Maybe they should have made a 90 second limit for regular users and unlimited for Pro users? This 90 seconds is bull. I&#8217;m very disappointed with their decision. Maybe they should also change their photo upload limit to 1 MB per photo, because you know, it would be really artistic for someone to pull off a 3-exposure photo into an HDR photo with a 7-10 megapixel camera, and then be able to compress that into 1024 kB. //end rant &gt;:(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135361</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:05:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135361</guid>
		<description>I get that they&#039;re trying to avoid the illegal content, but I would have liked to see a slightly larger time limit. Maybe 5 or 10 minutes? I would be okay with that, but I actually don&#039;t have any movies that I want to upload that are under 90 seconds. Hopefully they&#039;ll consider revising their policy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I get that they&#8217;re trying to avoid the illegal content, but I would have liked to see a slightly larger time limit. Maybe 5 or 10 minutes? I would be okay with that, but I actually don&#8217;t have any movies that I want to upload that are under 90 seconds. Hopefully they&#8217;ll consider revising their policy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Change</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135357</link>
		<dc:creator>Change</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135357</guid>
		<description>Hmm, good point Ashley.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm, good point Ashley.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashley</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135354</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135354</guid>
		<description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-135341&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Change wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;90 seconds, 180 seconds.. both would be fine in my opinion. I think you can do great artistic stuff in that timeframe, and I believe that this is what Flickr is for. They’ve called it moving pictures, and like this it does become moving pictures and not really movies. I would expect that it drives a different type of content, which will make them different from the rest. That might turn out really positively.

A limit on size alone would allow people to encode badly, which not only degenerates the quality of the videos (and thus the brand - Flickr), but also makes it possible to put 30 minute videos online. That is an invitation to illegal content again :) 

By the way - they increased the size per photo for all users (see their blog announcement, it’s at the end).&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
There are certinaly going to be people that try to get artistic with the 90 seconds they are given, and those 90 seconds will probably be plenty. However, for those who use Flickr as a photo sharing service for friends and family, they&#039;re going to want to share the videos they take on their camera with those people just as they do their photos, and 90 seconds may not be enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-135341" rel="nofollow">Change wrote:</a><br />
<blockquote>90 seconds, 180 seconds.. both would be fine in my opinion. I think you can do great artistic stuff in that timeframe, and I believe that this is what Flickr is for. They’ve called it moving pictures, and like this it does become moving pictures and not really movies. I would expect that it drives a different type of content, which will make them different from the rest. That might turn out really positively.</p>
<p>A limit on size alone would allow people to encode badly, which not only degenerates the quality of the videos (and thus the brand &#8211; Flickr), but also makes it possible to put 30 minute videos online. That is an invitation to illegal content again <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>By the way &#8211; they increased the size per photo for all users (see their blog announcement, it’s at the end).</p></blockquote>
</div>
<p>There are certinaly going to be people that try to get artistic with the 90 seconds they are given, and those 90 seconds will probably be plenty. However, for those who use Flickr as a photo sharing service for friends and family, they&#8217;re going to want to share the videos they take on their camera with those people just as they do their photos, and 90 seconds may not be enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vaibhav</title>
		<link>http://cybernetnews.com/flickr-video-arrives-with-limitations/comment-page-1/#comment-135352</link>
		<dc:creator>Vaibhav</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:21:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=11979#comment-135352</guid>
		<description>A lot of people don&#039;t like the idea, and some of these are pro users:
http://www.onlineobservations.net/protests-on-flickr-video/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot of people don&#8217;t like the idea, and some of these are pro users:<br />
[<a href='http://www.onlineobservations.net/protests-on-flickr-video/' rel='nofollow'>onlineobservations.net</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
