4 ms·

Instagrams "view this post on instagram" thing is truly despicable.

giuliomagnifico 6y ago
Absolutely! But for photographer is like “Star it on GitHub” or “Follow on Medium”, damn make your own website and upload there the photos, then send the article to the blogs/magazines! Are your photos on your website. Obviously you wouldn’t get the same visibility and traffic, that the trade-off we -as photographers- have to pay. I hate to see “personal link/page” linked from articles to an Instagram/Facebook feed instead of a personal website.
- trinix912 6y ago
  Yeah, Instagram embeds are pretty much the photography equivalent of GitHub Gist (and YouTube) embeds. It's a simple and unified solution.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    But unlike Instagram embeds, Gist and YouTube embeds aren't crappy, downscaled versions of original content, and they actually display on the embedding page - unlike here, where all you get to see is "View this post on Instagram".
    - RandallBrown 6y ago
      I just see the post embedded in the page. Maybe you have an ad blocker or something that messes with the embedding?
      - everyone 6y ago
        From reading other comments, I guess it needs to see you logged into Instagram via tracking cookies before images will display.
        RandallBrown 6y ago
        It worked for me even in incognito mode.
- yosito 6y ago
  Instagram's manipulation of users is making the market ripe for another photography platform to step up. I've tried a few alternatives. Flickr has decent functionality, but is overpriced and lacking in social features. Right now I host my own photo galleries, but there's a lot of friction to the workflow, and it requires some technical knowledge that not everyone has.
- mlindner 6y ago
  Yeah except Github doesn't block you from viewing things if you don't have an account, Instagram does. I don't know why photographers use it if they want people to see their stuff as it actively blocks people from seeing things. Flickr still exists and is much better as it allows viewing without having an account.

Absolutely! But for photographer is like “Star it on GitHub” or “Follow on Medium”, damn make your own website and upload there the photos, then send the article to the blogs/magazines! Are your photos on your website. Obviously you wouldn’t get the same visibility and traffic, that the trade-off we -as photographers- have to pay. I hate to see “personal link/page” linked from articles to an Instagram/Facebook feed instead of a personal website.

trinix912 6y ago
Yeah, Instagram embeds are pretty much the photography equivalent of GitHub Gist (and YouTube) embeds. It's a simple and unified solution.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  But unlike Instagram embeds, Gist and YouTube embeds aren't crappy, downscaled versions of original content, and they actually display on the embedding page - unlike here, where all you get to see is "View this post on Instagram".
  - RandallBrown 6y ago
    I just see the post embedded in the page. Maybe you have an ad blocker or something that messes with the embedding?
    - everyone 6y ago
      From reading other comments, I guess it needs to see you logged into Instagram via tracking cookies before images will display.
      - RandallBrown 6y ago
        It worked for me even in incognito mode.
yosito 6y ago
Instagram's manipulation of users is making the market ripe for another photography platform to step up. I've tried a few alternatives. Flickr has decent functionality, but is overpriced and lacking in social features. Right now I host my own photo galleries, but there's a lot of friction to the workflow, and it requires some technical knowledge that not everyone has.
mlindner 6y ago
Yeah except Github doesn't block you from viewing things if you don't have an account, Instagram does. I don't know why photographers use it if they want people to see their stuff as it actively blocks people from seeing things. Flickr still exists and is much better as it allows viewing without having an account.