To Ipernity and Beyond ....

I have picked out eight photo-sharing websites from the many available, and set out below my brief impressions based on my visits to each as a non-member. The websites might work differently in some respects for members. I do not mention fees or levels of membership, which vary, just facilities. I have ignored websites that seem to be primarily image stores. All of the websites I mention appear to have some form of grouping, commenting, contact making facilities - taken as read, I can't try these out as a visitor. My impressions are set out in alphabetical order.

23hq A Danish company. This is a relatively small, very friendly website, based in Denmark. It seems to be run by its founders as a 'hobby' extension of their main enthusiasm in the video world. The facilities provided to members are quite basic. The pages are very white, like Flickr in its early days. Viewing pictures on black seems to be possible only via a slow slide show. The site is used by people interested in everything from hobby creative photography to family and holiday snaps. There is no facility to inhibit any visitor to the site downloading the full size version of any picture, regardless of copyright. It is not clear how committed or interested the controlling parties are going to be in developing their website over time to match Ipernity. But this website does have, in embryo, a similar 'feel' to it.

[23hq Addendum: There is more detailed information about 23hq below in comments by Fizgig.
In brief, the 23hq web site is more open to customisation by the individual member, and potentially much more secure, than my description above suggests.]

500px is based in Canada. The website is huge and the emphasis is on photographers getting 'exposure' - i.e. lots of views from an enormous membership. There is facility to market your pictures: a side-bar on each picture page indicates the prices you would charge to your customers. Apparently you do not have to offer your pictures for sale, it is your choice. For a fee, you can apparently use Adobe Creative Cloud, Photoshop and Lightroom software programmes. This website seems to be used by everyone from 'interested casual' to 'very serious' photographers. A 'view on black' command is just a click away, slide shows are snappy and user controlled. Pictures are rendered nicely but it is necessary to use full screen on black to git rid of the extraneous non-picture material on quite 'busy' pages.

Animus3 This is a USA based company. It sets out to be a global community of everyday photographers at varying levels of experience. Posting of only one picture a day is allowed - users of the website are expected to process their work to a high standard and to consider, 'Is this really worth sharing'. The shop front says "Aminus3 began to shift in its purpose. From an image a day photoblog community to a place where culture, education, language and social responsibility meet amazing photography, and a realization that we are all on this journey together". It is necessary to look beyond this mission statement - I found that exploring the site as a visitor showed it to be less daunting than the shop front suggests. You will find some stunning creativity, some humorous/fun pictures, and some family/holiday material; and yes, the pictures do seem to emanate from all over the world. Members seem to have some choice over the way their pictures will appear, with black, grey or white backgrounds. I could achieve very good 'full screen on black/grey/white' views for some, but not all, of the pictures. Perhaps this is down to each member's personal set-up choice.

Flickr A USA company. After I joined Ipernity in 2013, I kept my old account on Flickr as I had some family and a few long-standing contacts. It is well known that people post just about anything on Flickr: and that is a large part of its value and what gives it as unique an identity as that of the other websites mentioned here. You can find 'phone camera selfies, everyday picture diaries, records of peoples' rites of passage, serious hobbyists' work and some absolutely top class, creative photography. There is of course sharing and Flickr is good at keeping members up to date with the newest postings by their contacts and fellow group members. Alongside the sharing there are various levels of copyright chosen by each member. The pictures are not reproduced with quite the quality you get on Ipernity due, I think, to the Flickr 'processing' mechanism on upload. But viewing full screen pictures on black and user controlled slideshows is easy and instinctive. Flickr seems to be the favoured photo sharing website for Google Image Search results - over the years I have received numerous requests to use my pictures (under the Creative Commons licence) but these were all received through the Flickr web-site, none through Ipernity. Flickr is controlled by Yahoo and is therefore vulnerable to the survival of that company and to the decisions of its controlling parties.

Fotoblur A Californian company. 'The photo community for creative photographers' where you can 'share, learn and interact with the world's most inspirational photo community'. The pictures viewable as a visitor indicate that there is indeed a lot of creative picture making here, although like Aminus3 the range is rather wider than the shop front suggests. I could not work out why some pictures had white, and some black, backgrounds - perhaps it is the member's choice. I failed to achieve any 'full screen on black (or white)' views without distracting extraneous material at top, bottom and side, of the pictures. There seems to be a lot of very impressive black and white photography on this website. That, and some sepia work, looked very good on my Eizo monitor. Much of the colour work available to the visitor was heavily manipulated and I found it difficult to locate anything with clear, realistic colours; but presumably I was seeing what the picture creators intended.

Ipernity (French.) I visited here as a paying member! 'Simply the best'. (I have tried to keep my other observations neutral!)

Slickpic A USA company. The shop front says: "It takes only a few clicks to create a meaningful space for your images. A place where our uncluttered, easy-to-navigate galleries let your photos do all the talking. A place that preserves the quality of your images while always protecting your privacy. A place you can customize for showcasing your images or keeping them private. A place where you are always in control." There is a lot of emphasis on the ability to use the site from mobile phones. A visitor can only view a small but well varied selection of pictures (NB the websites emphasis on security and privacy) which look good but can only be seen on a white background even when in 'full screen'. Elsewhere on the web I learned that "you can create photoblogs and actually have a professional designer enhance your favorite photographs (for a fee). It also offers plug-in integration with Adobe Lightroom, Windows Gallery, Apple Aperture, and Apple iPhoto."

Smugmug The shop front says "Photos are a reflection of your experiences—what drives you, where you’ve been, where you’re going, who you love. SmugMug is a safe, beautiful home for all of it—your journey and your photos. Protect your photos and memories with a SmugMug site and give them a place to shine." There is an emphasis on making portfolios of pictures - your photo collection, your family history, your daily life, expressing your personal relationship with the world - for sharing informally or promoting (for sale) your pictures. Design templates (apparently customisable) are provided for members. There are a few sample portfolios available to the visitor, but no general access to members' work.

thanks for these informations.
In the past, I tried 500px, flickr, and others but nothing with such a value for money than Ipernity.
Perhaps, I'll return to hard proof and paperboard !

@ John Sheldon: Thanks for all the time and effort you put into this excellent review!

I had never heard of 500px - so I went and had a look. Their website looks impressive, but I can't quite figure out their pricing policy, and what their maximum upload is, whether they save photos in various file size formats, etc., - among other things.

I moved my stuff from iPernity to 23hq, but am cautiously optimistic - especially for web site that proclaims itself as "just a hobby offshoot".

I've also tried smugmug, but I find (as with most of the other sites in your review) that community social interaction is lacking - and I miss that sense of community among like-minded hobby or casual photographers.

There was at one time - webshots.com - which was very similar to smugmug, but webshots was sold and the site was restructured as a screensaver and wallpaper site for desktop downloads (and stealing hundreds of users photos in the process!).

Of the choices given, I like what 23hq has to offer. The site has potential, but I get the impression that the site owners have little interest in developing it.

Thanks John. This has made me think of all the places I have scattered my photos ( WHY have I done this ?)

I too came from Flickr and still have an active free account - I made the decison to move to iPernity and pay for the service. I have tried 500px as a paid account trial period only and now free account which restricts uploads so I have left it behind for now.

Flickr continues to be very unattractive to my eyes and each time they update and change this it seems to make it more flashy for no great gain. Its future after Yahoo is sold has to be in doubt Verizon will either change it all again or sell it on ( if they can )

500px is equally flashy but has a very large number of people prepared to comment or rate photos for you especially if you categorise them as you upload. Anyone who wants feedback and receive stars from all around the world this may be the place.

I did have photos on PicassaWeb now migrated to Google photos but not keen on them and have left them some time ago.

I also have many more photos stored on Photobox than I have ever printed or included in Calendars etc.

Also my own web site and most recently a test upload to Amazon Prime.

PLUS Blipfoto and even Twitter

I am on Facebook but I don't find it a good place to look at or store photos BUT it is where many people I know in real life especially other local photographers can be found so it does have that going for it.

I feel like going back and deleting my photos from some of the above!

I don't feel very enthusiastic about moving somewhere new if iPernity does disappear but will be interested in any further comments on the alternatives.

Just look in the Wayback Machine ... I found some very interesting things of mine from eons ago which 'I deleted' -- nope... they are in there !

Firefox blocks me when I try to go to another page .. but nice to know they are in there.

Delightful capture!

Admired in:
www.ipernity.com/group/tolerance

You have been busy!! Very kind of you to share your views.
Thank you for all the feedback; always good to have a user's insight, away for the publicity..
The most tricky element though, when one leaves a site (I've lived through this event before) is to keep one's friends/ contacts ...and this might take precedence over other matters.
There are a few weeks left within Ipernity yet, before we know for sure, ..and in my view, time which is to be fully enjoyed :)
Have a nice day John !

Thank you, John for your contribution.
Interesting... I also came over here in 2013 from F -- yet we meet in uncertain times.
Regards,
Peggy

One thing you did not mention about 23HQ which is a MAJOR plus is how customizable it is.... It's not true that you can simply download anything. In fact. through its powerful CSS engine, you can make it so nothing you post can be downloaded or even viewed beyond your parameters. You can eliminate the "more view options" button altogether, eliminate sharing of your albums, and so much more. Sites like Flickr and this site don't have that option -- it is very simple to download ANY photo on both this site and Flickr's and there is nothing you can do to prevent it because the sites aren't customizable. Yes, 23HQ is an offshoot of a very successful media company, but that's more a selling point than a negative. As we've seen from many examples of photo sharing companies failing left and right, there isn't any real profit to be made.... You HAVE to have something else beside to support the business. In 23's case, yes, that has affected development somewhat, but you have to have demand before you put time, effort, and resources into development. To their credit they thought of bridging the gap a bit by allowing virtually complete user customization of their acct. through CSS. The downside to that, though, is that most people looking to enjoy the photo sharing experience aren't into coding to customize their photo sharing site. But there are folks at 23 who are very willing to help those who want to work with CSS to manage their photos, accts., etc. No other photo sharing site on the web offers that experience. So, 23HQ is as unique as ipernity....

Not that I'm an advocate for 23HQ --- I'll be the first to admit it has issues.... But it's a far better and closer alternative to this site than any other on the web right now. I'd rather see ipernity survive than have to change sites, too....

Anyway, thought I'd mention that CSS thing because it's a major part of the experience on that site and makes a big difference in your assessment of content security.

I think too that 23hq is - compared with other alternatives to Ipernity I know - closest to what we find here. But what I have to complain about it is the fact that 23hq unfortunately is also an insecure website, because it has like Ipernity no https. :((

A photo site doesn't need to be secured with HTTPS. That prefix is useful only for sites which potentially deal with sensitive data --- email, shopping, so on.... There's no need for it for hosting photos or videos. If you look at one of the most secure art/photo hosting sites --- DeviantArt --- it isn't on a secure connection either and yet, they offer the best theft deterring code available to secure uploaded material. It is darn near impossible to grab material off of that site even if you're fairly knowledgeable with code unless the owner allows it to be viewed at high res. or offers it for download.

23HQ can be customized to improve the security of any acct. holder's material through CSS. And I know many will argue that not everyone is a coder.... I understand that.... That isn't my point. My point is that the possibility and/or capability is there to have fuller control of your stuff ---- even more than here.

Don't be lulled into the HTTPS false sense of "security".... Flickr has an HTTPS domain.... It is one of the least secure sites for content around. You can download ANYTHING uploaded on that site if it's visible. It doesn't matter what security settings a person uses for their acct. or anything. So it's not the HTTPS that makes a site secure... It takes a lot more than that. The beauty of an open code or customizable code site like 23 is that you, the acct. holder, can add to the security to your own stuff. Is it perfect? No, of course not.... And CSS coding isn't for everyone.... But, aside from DeviantArt, it is your most secure option. The nice thing about CSS is that the code is all written -- there's nothing new.... You just have to be willing to ask for assistance. There are a few very helpful & knowledgeable folks over on 23HQ who are more than willing to help anyone who asks tinker. And, as I said, much of the tinkering has been done, so it's just a matter of digging up the code for it.

Thank you very much Fizgig for your insight and most of all (as John mentions below) for your will to share your knowledge and expertise; there is a lot of misinformation about that people take for granted...and alarmists are rife. This is a complex and highly specialized field that requires depth of knowledge that few of us here have.

You're welcome =) That's all I'm trying to do -- dispel all the rife alarmist crap that is out there..... Especially when most of it is coming from people who don't understand the concept and design behind a site like 23HQ and immediately start spouting off alarmist propaganda.... Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have ipernity survive than have to move, but it's unfair for people to judge alternative sites based on the biases of those who can't even manage to USE said site. Some of the people complaining about 23HQ didn't even stick around long enough to figure out how to use the site! That's what gets me.... Doesn't bother me to say, legitimately, that certain features are lacking or difficult to use, etc..... That's fine. But to say a site is terrible and all your stuff is going to be stolen based on less than a week's time spent on the site is ridiculous -- not just less than a week's time, but also not taking the time to contact one of the admins. and request a temporary FREE full membership to open up all the features available. That's what sticks in my craw. And those who have a bias against more complex tech. That doesn't make a site less favorable.... Just means some folks can't get the hang of it.... That's fine... But don't go saying the site "sucks" because you can't figure out how to use it or, worse yet, don't want to learn anything new to make the site work for you.

Anyway.... Off my soap box ;)

Fizgig and Peter Bolson: Thank you for your input. I had hoped that people with actual experience as members of the 'alternatives photo-sharing sites' would contribute to this article, as my review of the sites was simply done as a 'visitor'. Let's all hope that we don't need to choose a website other than Ipernity!

@Fizgig
Thanks for your explanation.
I don't know very less about IT and internet security.
I only know, that when I login to Ipernity my password manager always asks me, if I really want to login to an insecure site !?
Like many others I have uploaded not only photos for public. When I log in to my account I will have the certainty that is only me who knows the password and who is able to log in.

@Leonora:
Sorry, but I don't see me as an alarmist.
My English is not so good, so I let it go at that.

Logins at 23HQ are as secure as any site on the internet. Just because it doesn't have the HTTPS in its URL doesn't mean it can't be secure. Again, it doesn't deal with financial information or sensitive data, so there is no need for HTTPS. I have a whole host of web browsers & security software on my computer(s), as I regularly check & alter codes on sites, and none of them raise any alarms for 23HQ. The same cannot be said for Flickr or Yahoo! -- their HTTPS "secure" sites are a joke. You are more likely to have your login credentials compromised on sites that use third party logins --- i.e. sites where you can use a Yahoo or Google, etc., login to get into your acct. In that regard alone, 23HQ is more secure than ipernity, Flickr, and many others.