Flickr doesn’t need any video. Seriously.
Mike over at Techcrunch has an article today about how Yahoo is launching their Yahoo! Video offer and how disappointing it is that they didn’t integrate video with Flickr instead of launching this new product. Now, that isn’t disappointing at all – it’s a god damn relief. Here’s why.
Online video is still a slipperly slope. No one knows how they should do it yet. Youtube seems to be the most successful model so far but still has huge issues – which I’ll talk about in a future article. Other players (and they’re countless) are still experimenting with delivery methods, how to organize the information, how to catalogue it, etc. There’s a problem to be solved in online video sharing, organizing and searching.
Flickr on the other hand doesn’t have a problem – it just works. It has users, it is successful, it is the only (and I really do mean the only) web application for which I’ve paid for thus far, and it keeps on growing. Bringing in the video-problem jello to Flickr would create chaos and a lot of confusion among its users. Why should a service have both photos and videos if it suits its purpose just fine as it is? Photos are the reason Flickr has its name.
Now, there is no indication that the two products (Flickr and Yahoo! Video) will ever be integrated. Mike just said he was disappointed – and I’m saying I’m not disappointed at all. To each his own opinion, but I’d prefer integration came after both kinds of media (photos and video) had their organization and delivery problems solved.
I definately agree with you. Flickr is really clean and works effortlessly and I’ve yet to encounter any type of video sharing site I can say the same about.
Unforunately it seems mainly to be MySpace users that are into sharing videos of questionable nature (both in content and copyright) The video sharing sites feel more like ImageShack than Flickr at the moment.
I agree. The Flickr name sounds kinda like it should be a video site, but I’m glad it’s not; it would just be too much, I think.
Vimeo has done the best job in the personal online video arena, from what I’ve seen. There are no tv rips and it doesn’t seem to have the problems YouTube has, possibly because it’s smaller, but I think mostly because Vimeo’s users really respect the place. It’s a great community, like Flickr is, and the users are big fans. Winning combination.
YES! Thank you. I agree with you completely. Flickr does a great job at one specific thing, and thats uploading and sharing photos. Video is a totally different game. I think Mike needs to read Get Real. Flickr is one of the few web apps that I have paid for, and thats because they don’t try to do to much. You want to know why I and alot of people hate myspace? Because it tries to do everything. YouTube is successful (not sure if they are financially, but they have hit critical mass) because it did one thing and it did it very well, uploading and sharing videos.
Totally agreed…
Totally agreed with you !
I agree that the last thing Flickr needs is some teenager in Portugal posting his bloc party lip sync videos…but when i go on a trip and take video and pictures of an event or whatever, those two things should go in the same place. Flickr is where I store my pictures. I use youtube to store the videos. I want them to be in the same place.
But anyway, its nice to have a conversation for once where people aren’t telling me how stupid I am or threatening to kill my dog. thanks fred. :-)
and answer my email damnit.
wouldn’t you love to see Flickr solve the online video problem you just mapped out?
Mike: I wouldn’t kill laguna, but I’d steal her ;) I miss that god damn dog.
Fred, totally agreed with you! Flickr just works, hell everthing on Flickr just works. Photos and video?! No thanks.
Google Video rocks my world.
Photos and videos are very different things that differnt people take for different reasons.
(And if the same person is taking photos *and* videos, they are taking them for different reasons.)
I’m not convinced that Flickr needs video … although Michael Arrington’s comment on this blog post is the most convincing argument I’ve seen so far. If they did it, I would think it would have to be paying Pro clients only …
[...] 11) … euh … video? YouTube wordt de ‘Flickr for Video’ genoemd en er wordt druk gediscusseerd over de vraag of Flickr ook video zou moeten aanbieden, zeker na de introductie van Yahoo! Video. Dat zou gelijk weer hele nieuwe mogelijkheden bieden. [...]
Never quite understood the photos and videos in the same place thing. We’ve never ever done photos and videos in the same place… not in real life. Do you ever go to someone’s house to look at pictures and watch video at the same time? Its a very different experience and doesn’t need “one service to rule them all”. I don’t want my IMs and my e-mail in the same place, either.
I agree that photo and video don’t serve the same purpose, but the fact remains that most digital cameras can shoot video and many consumers utilize that function.
If I go to a concert, snap 10 great photos of the act, and catch a great video of the encore, why should I have to use two separate services to share those similar elements with my friends?
I agree that so much of the video on youtube doesnt belong on flickr, but much of the location- or event-based video that accompanies photographs does.
I absolutely agree. Is Mike over at TechCrunch an avid Flickr user, because it doesn’t sound like he understands the Flickr community at all.
There’s something special about photography that is lost with video, and there’s something beautiful about sharing your images, commenting, critiquing, and generally building a community of photography lovers.
Meanwhile, unless something unexpected happens down the road, the most we’re ever going to get out of these video sharing sites is an easy place to find funny clips. In other words, I can see Flickr booming long after sites like YouTube have been relegated to footnotes in Wikipedia articles about Internet history and culture.
Most digital camera allow for short videos as well as pictures. When I’m on vacation, I’ll take some pics and sometimes shoot a short video to capture the sounds (just another medium for capturing the moment IMHO…e.g., that bird was beautiful, but you should hear its song too). I’d prefer to upload them all to share w/ others. Flickr works great, but my little videos are left behind. Agreed, let video buffs use youtube & the like…but what’s wrong with wanting at least minimal video support to get all of my vacation shots (short videos included) onto a single site?