I guess photo bucket will not allow me to link my pics any more. Apparently it's against their terms and conditions unless I start paying for there clunky service.
Anybody else having this problem and what's a good alternative?
lol, I was just about to post the same thread! I'll just attach it to yours.
"Photobucket holding my pictures hostage....
Well looks like unless I pay photobucket ransome money my pictures won't show up in my post any longer. What is the best option now for pictures?"
here's a test using Google Photos..
[img]
https://goo.gl/photos/vn5ca7iCfJPAFZWf8[/img]
It lets you share a photo link, but so far I can't see how to put in the actual picture itself (which I prefer)
I noticed links still work in Photohostage
Looks like mine is working. However,, I pay Photobucket a couple dollars a month. I exceeded the storage allotment for new accounts a few years ago. I'm also busy on a couple of motorcycle forums where I post a lot of trip reports with pics. Ive cut back on posting pictures here though, because I was under the impression that they slowed down the website. I didn't think folks were reviewing my questions because I had too many pictures. So I've been trying to switch to links..
My photobucket pictures are still hosting fine. Maybe I'm under the storage limit?
I think it's the "I subscribe" pond boss fish graphic that many people have in their profile. Other pictures seem to work. When I removed my "I subscribe" graphic, the third party thing went away.
My "I subscribe" is still there.
that would be up to pond boss admin team to get their photobucket account working again?
I don't have the "I subscribe", never have, and mine is still locked. Sad thing Is I clicked on my pics in the thread to login, and now I can't remember my login...
On mine, it was the "I subscribe" graphic causing the same pic to come up as the OP.
that would be up to pond boss admin team to get their photobucket account working again?
The "I subscribe" in my signature is stored in my Photobucket account.
Test, just uploaded a picture to Photobucket from last night. A little male RES.
I think Photobucket is detecting the amount of bandwidth used for 3rd party hosing, and cuts you off if it is too much. If you are only hosting a few images, it doesn't seem to trigger.
You cannot get in-line images from Google as there are not links to a direct file, but a query to retrieve an image. Also the "https:\\" out in front confuses the forum software. I have resorted to using links, though IMHO inserting images adds a lot to this forum's presentation.
I must not be above their content storage limit or my account is old enough that they haven't squashed "hot linking" yet.
http://photobucket.com/termsLast revised June 28, 2017
Free account : Each individual Member gets one free account that provides 2 GB of free storage or space available for your original photo files, or videos under 10min. The free account does not allow any image linking or 3rd party image hosting. If a free account Member exceeds their Content Limit, their account will be immediately suspended and they will need to become a “Paying Member” (defined below) in order to continue accessing their account. You can upgrade to a Plus account at any time.
I am thinking that photosucket has changed there terms or I never read them to begin with. My photos are all intact there, but my links have been disabled. I don't know how they do that. There terms states...
"The free account does not allow any image linking or 3rd party image hosting"
If your free account is working with 3rd party hosting, it may just be a matter of time before you're busted and all your photo PB threads are jacked up.
Hopefully there is a better photo sharing site recommendation coming to this topic soon.
Edit: I am way below the storage limits and they want $400 a year for the 3rd party hosting option. I am really not privy to how these photo sharing sites work, so, if any one see an error in my thinking, set me straight.
We have discussed in the past that other software that hosts online forums allow for direct upload or hosting of images from the posting user's computer to the message.
The board here already lets us upload images to our messages as attachments, what would it take to take the next step to remove the requirement for 3rd party photo hosting to allow the photos to embed in the body of the messages?
I think Sunil stated it is costly to add that much storage.
if the images are stored by being allowed to be attached to the messages, is it that much more costly to move them to inside the body of the message itself rather than being attached below the message?
Just wondering about logistics and what the software that hosts this can handle.
