4 ms·
Flickr is pretty horrible as a photo site. It's full of garbage, the options of browsing quality content are very limited. Try to get the highest rated photos
by olegkikin 16y ago
Flickr is pretty horrible as a photo site. It's full of garbage, the options of browsing quality content are very limited.
Try to get the highest rated photos of the last week/month/year, for example.
- nsfmc 16y agoTry to get the highest rated photos of the last week/month/year, for example. I don't really know anyone that uses flickr this way, or at least i should say that flickr is not explicitly about quantitatively accessing massive photosets. Highest rated photos, though? I don't think taste is a numerical metric. edit: superfluous asterisks
- zalew 16y agoWhat you say doesn't prove that is horrible as a photo site. Yes, you're right, exploring through 'ratings' often leads to garbage if one has some better taste in photography, as in most of photo rankings and contests on the web. That doesn't mean that it doesn't meet it's purpose as a photo sharing website. Also, besides it's native explore/search functions there are tools around flickr where you can explore photos through different parameters, try f.ex. using my buddy's tool http://fffflckr.com/ http://fffflckr.com/ it grabs 'favorites of your favorites', it's quite handy and it's easier to find sth you probably will like. I've used their API many times for some experiments, and if you feel you got a way to find great content, it'll be probably very easy to build a tool for that. That's also a great advantage of flickr.