If you use Imageshack...

I just went onto imageshack and found this message:

Quote:

---

You have 1308 photos stored. Since you're over the 500 photo limit you'll need to upgrade to a Premium account or you'll only be able to keep 500 of your recent photos. Older photos will expire on the 1st of March.

---

So much for unlimited uploads. If any of you have pictures stored there, you might want to download them soon, if you don't have them backed up, and find a new host. This is going to be a real pain, because almost all of the pictures on my website are hosted on imageshack.

Use the Google Image search utility I found to know what pages they're on.

For the most part, I only have pictures here and on my website, so finding where I've posted the pictures isn't an issue. Having to replace over a thousand image links to keep the pictures live is what bothers me.

Start getting those pix transfered!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Technochicken

Having to replace over a thousand image links to keep the pictures live is what bothers me.

---

This here is why I hope flickr doesn't abandon me...

Photobucket go. I've easily got thousands of pics on my photobucket. Imageshack has gone way downhill.

Yea Photobucket only makes you upgrade if you exceed your monthly bandwidth on their free account. I had to upgrade after Tempest SXR got featured on HaD lol.

I sometimes use my Facebook account for pictures.

Other times, my Ubuntu One account. (Which I do plan on transferring my few pictures over, to save space....)

Facebook handles all my hosting needs

This is one of the reasons why using cloud services can be scary. you never really know what the third party is going to do. Trying to replace over 1k worth of pics sounds more then a jobs worth :eek:

atleast they gave you a heads up. could be like a megaupload moment disappears and you never get your data back :facepalm:

Quote:

---

I sometimes use my Facebook account for pictures.

---

How do you do that? just make them publically avaible in your album and embed the url? sounds interesting either way