4 ms·

So what is the main difference between Instagram and something like Flickr? They are both social sites/apps that revolve around photographs. But Flickr always s

So what is the main difference between Instagram and something like Flickr? They are both social sites/apps that revolve around photographs. But Flickr always seemed more about photography and less about selfies/influencers/likes/etc… Maybe the author would be better served by a community closer to Flickr than Instagram? It’s no longer as popular, but for the purposes of sharing photos with the world, maybe it’s a better fit? Instead of giving up photography, the author might want to think more about why they got started in the first place. It probably wasn’t to get likes. So maybe there is a different way… or different community that would be a better fit for what they want to accomplish.

yoz-y 5y ago
Original community I guess. Flickr was more geared towards pros and amateurs (in the original sense). Instagram was made specifically for iPhone users.
- ghaff 5y ago
  Of course you'll find no shortage of people who will opine that "Flickr could have been Instagram." Which is probably true from a financial perspective I guess. But doing anything along those lines would probably have been fundamentally incompatible with its original purpose. It's OK to be a niche however un-Silicon Valley that is.
TeMPOraL 5y ago
Instagram was mobile-first, Flickr was not. This lends to completely different usage patterns, completely different communities. I agree with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28550590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28550590 here.
- alvarlagerlof 5y ago
  Yeah this was the reason I ended up there. Wanted to share with my family and friends. They all had Instagram on their phones.
barrenko 5y ago
I've always low key expected for some kind of startup that used the generic photography portofolio (the one where all images are laid out in an infinite horizontal "scroll") + user accounts and sharing. Hasn't really happened. When you think about it , all social media is about a feed that is vertical (top to bottom) and smartphone screen oriented which is the opposite of standard photo formats. Doesn't even work for most of the old square formats.

yoz-y 5y ago

Original community I guess. Flickr was more geared towards pros and amateurs (in the original sense). Instagram was made specifically for iPhone users.

ghaff 5y ago
Of course you'll find no shortage of people who will opine that "Flickr could have been Instagram." Which is probably true from a financial perspective I guess. But doing anything along those lines would probably have been fundamentally incompatible with its original purpose. It's OK to be a niche however un-Silicon Valley that is.

TeMPOraL 5y ago

Instagram was mobile-first, Flickr was not. This lends to completely different usage patterns, completely different communities. I agree with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28550590 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28550590 here.

alvarlagerlof 5y ago
Yeah this was the reason I ended up there. Wanted to share with my family and friends. They all had Instagram on their phones.

barrenko 5y ago

I've always low key expected for some kind of startup that used the generic photography portofolio (the one where all images are laid out in an infinite horizontal "scroll") + user accounts and sharing. Hasn't really happened. When you think about it , all social media is about a feed that is vertical (top to bottom) and smartphone screen oriented which is the opposite of standard photo formats. Doesn't even work for most of the old square formats.