Comments on: One question on Flickr Video: Why?

By: Sam Davyson

Sam Davyson — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:53:38 +0000

I think it is worth adding video just to give that “Togetherness”.

By: sgd

sgd — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:53:38 +0000

I think it is worth adding video just to give that “Togetherness”.

By: srini kumar

srini kumar — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 04:43:51 +0000

yay if it's embeddable. there are so many available segments in online video. “go up against youtube” is a mistaken premise – there is room for all. unless these companies segment, they're doomed, but segmenting online video offerings through holistic branding – piece of cake. we met several brilliant flickr folks during the web awards ceremony in austin last week. they are no slouches, flickr has a PHENOMENAL brand for video (there's even an indie film revue down in chapel hill nc called flicker – it is obvious), and every single segment that is on TV and then some could sprout its own channel. look at the wine guy. i rest my case.

By: Rex Hammock

Rex Hammock — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 04:31:30 +0000

Random answers: YouTube is a distribution channel. Flickr is a personal archival service. My Canon TX1 shoot HD video and photographs that upload automatically to iPhoto. iPhoto has a plug-in that uploads media directly to Flickr. I can download in their original format back to my computer the photos I have stored on Flickr — and I am guessing I'll be able to do that with video — can I do that with YouTube?

By: mndoci

mndoci — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 02:36:03 +0000

I kinda agree. Sometimes simple is best. I don't see adding video to Flickr being of value right now, especially with so many alternatives available.

That said, I can see this being useful for some people used to adding material to Flickr. I just don't think that number will be enough. We'll see.