Imagehost Problems, Imagebam, Imagevenue, PimpAndHost, PixHost, ImgBox etc

[Fabrizio]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

If you have posted a lot of images using Imagevenue then please by all means go back and replace any dead images you find.

10/15 days ago I started to replace dead images in my Magazines posts.
In the past I have always used ImageVenue. Therefore I used the following system:
1) up to 4 lost images, I replaced them, one by one, with ImageVenue.
2) more than 4 images, I reposted the entire scan with Imagebam.

In both case I checked for non allowed images in the repost. In the complete set, using Imagebam. Only in replaced images, using Imagevenue.

But a problem occurred....: in a Mag there was, alive and not replaced, a page with a cartoon ... with children. No photos, only drawings.

Promptly I received a PM from a moderator who pointed out the fact and invited me to fix it (done).

This made me very annoyed. I stopped to replace dead images and, for the moment, I stopped posting my scans.

Ciao

[buttsie]

I'm pretty sure many are looking at hosts that have images alive many years after their first upped thinking its all good

Closer inspection even on hosts that claim lifetime for pics says if they go inactive for 12 months or more their dead - thumbnails are usually left in place - so none are the wiser.

Imagebam from 2009 - 77 pics - 70 thumbnails still visible - 29 pics alive

http://www.vintage-erotica-forum.com...9&postcount=72

I'd almost say the smartest thing any of us could do is re-visit our own posts once a year
and download them ourselves.

As well as adding descriptive words / tags that may lead those searching to the post


Filehosts have been moving to cull the inactive and imagehosts will be no different
with rising bandwidth costs and lessening revenue from ads

[bigbobnobody]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

It would but many posts with dead images are from members who have now left for whatever reason.
There is no one size fits all solution. It is not practical to PM every member about every post we find so it has to be a joint effort. If you have posted a lot of images using Imagevenue then please by all means go back and replace any dead images you find.
I'm working through my old posts as I go along but I suspect many won't have the will or the time to do the same.
It is a browser thing if I use IE, Chrome and Firefox and here's how one post with a mix of live and dead images looks on each, Firefox only picks up live images

With me, it's been a mix of diving into a thread head first, and trying to
fix everything at once, and as you said.....as I come to them. As you know
though...........when you've been here for a while.....one's pics add up lol
btw.....looks like Imagebam is offline now too!

[bigbobnobody]

Originally Posted by NIN

I gave-up on IV years ago Having to log-in almost every time, consistently loosing 1 in 12 images regularly, lack of gallery control for viewers (next/previous image) and that weird folder system with a limit of 200 images which was fortunately never strictly adhered to. The only thing they have going for them is the swift upload, which ImageBam seem to have matched these days.

See......I'm just the opposite in my thinking about IV. I love their folder
system, and think that Ibam's is weird lol. I don't particularly like "gallery"
set ups, and with Imagebam, it seems that you basically have no choice
but to have each pic in a "gallery". Which basically means, that any pic
is in a folder, it's in with the rest of them whether you want them to be
viewed or not. As far as a limit on the number of pics in a folder....
first time I ever heard of a 200 pic limit. I know I have particular folders
with well over 500 pics in them. Upload speed seems about the same to
me I guess. Alot of my pic uploads are those large video thumbnail composites
that always are well over 1 mb in size, and those seem to take a bit to
ul with either site. I suppose whatever one is used to is what they think
is best, but when something happens like what happened with IV.....
that goes out the door! lol.

[buttsie]

Originally Posted by NIN

I gave-up on IV years ago Having to log-in almost every time, consistently loosing 1 in 12 images regularly, lack of gallery control for viewers (next/previous image) and that weird folder system with a limit of 200 images which was fortunately never strictly adhered to. The only thing they have going for them is the swift upload, which ImageBam seem to have matched these days.

A MAJOR difference for mine is


Imagevenue leave your own description intact and surround it with their code

Imagebam use their code and nothing else survives


On the otherside


Imagebam are just plain weird when it comes the banned images 1-3 out 15 of the same set seems to be around the mark

Imagevenue dont seem to ban any of the same pics in my experience

Imagevenues gallery set-up - you learn pretty quickly when you set it up dont ever test the link to soon after setting it up as it always ends with the gallery returning a 404
- the only fix - delete and set-up again

Imagebams galleries which are set-up at the beginning of the upload dont have the same issue



Imagebam basic upload 30 pics to upload but only 20 ever show up
- 20 limit in place but no mention - bizarre


Imagevenue - every now and then a message appears that the maximum limit on any html page is 60 images - you won find it in the faqs - how that works out on a forum where you could have anywhere from 25-5000pics viewed at any one time is beyond me.


Pimpndhost as much maligned as it is is still the only imagehost offering a zipfile back-up
which equates to adding a filehost link to other imagehosts


Imagebam appears to be one of the few to offer some sort of premium level membership
Makes them possibly a better bet given the over reliance on ad-revenue that other hosts are exposed to


Bottom line dont rely solely on any one service in the cloud
because they all fail at some stage

[NIN]

Originally Posted by bigbobnobody

See......I'm just the opposite in my thinking about IV. I love their folder
system, and think that Ibam's is weird lol. I don't particularly like "gallery"
set ups, and with Imagebam, it seems that you basically have no choice
but to have each pic in a "gallery". Which basically means, that any pic
is in a folder, it's in with the rest of them whether you want them to be
viewed or not. As far as a limit on the number of pics in a folder....
first time I ever heard of a 200 pic limit. I know I have particular folders
with well over 500 pics in them. Upload speed seems about the same to
me I guess. Alot of my pic uploads are those large video thumbnail composites
that always are well over 1 mb in size, and those seem to take a bit to
ul with either site. I suppose whatever one is used to is what they think
is best, but when something happens like what happened with IV.....
that goes out the door! lol.

My mistake , it says 200 Files limit, not images tho I'm sure I've exceeded even that count.
But when I refer to the usefulness of a gallery, I mean for a viewer to click 'next image' rather than have to open a further tab for each image. Admittedly, most people don't want a whole gallery, but there are also completists for some models.
I wish things worked purely how I imagine they could be configured too.

Originally Posted by buttsie

A MAJOR difference for mine is


Imagevenue leave your own description intact and surround it with their code

Imagebam use their code and nothing else survives

Yes, that is useful

Originally Posted by buttsie

On the otherside

Imagebam are just plain weird when it comes the banned images 1-3 out 15 of the same set seems to be around the mark

Imagevenue dont seem to ban any of the same pics in my experience

Yes true, ImageBam might ban some images in an upload, especially annoying as you don't find out it is banned after it uploaded - only after All have uploaded
- I asked on their forum if it was possible to show symbols for banned images 'As they are uploading' rather than get a disappointing list at the completion.
That seems unlikely as Flo hasn't replied to my suggestion,
again I refer to the reply above, I wish things were as configured to my ideal mind map

Originally Posted by buttsie

...

Imagebam basic upload 30 pics to upload but only 20 ever show up
- 20 limit in place but no mention - bizarre

I think i tried the basic upload twice - didn't like it,
way too fiddly & it's easier & quicker to select images from the Multi Upload page

Originally Posted by buttsie

Imagevenue - every now and then a message appears that the maximum limit on any html page is 60 images - you won find it in the faqs - how that works out on a forum where you could have anywhere from 25-5000pics viewed at any one time is beyond me.


Pimpndhost as much maligned as it is is still the only imagehost offering a zipfile back-up
which equates to adding a filehost link to other imagehosts

Great feature tho it does take some time to perform the ask

Originally Posted by buttsie

Imagebam appears to be one of the few to offer some sort of premium level membership
Makes them possibly a better bet given the over reliance on ad-revenue that other hosts are exposed to


Bottom line dont rely solely on any one service in the cloud
because they all fail at some stage

Nothing is ideal, pluses and minuses for all hosts, so you have to take a punt on the system that suits best. Sometimes imagehosts change their upload routine & it screws-up people for days & we all experienced occasional bad server technical difficulties from P&H and ImgBox, but all are prone to this.
It's a gamble & the best solution I've seen is to double-up as TriggerGod does, but if everyone did that the forum would be twice as large.

[DTravel]

Since everyone is posting their thoughts on this.

I will continue to upload to ImageVenue. I have a third party uploader with works perfectly with IV and has for years. Except for this recent attack on IV it has worked fine for many years and I like my file names appearing in the link.

I can't replace dead links in my posts, I don't have the time and in many cases I don't have the files anymore. If a link dies because no one has downloaded it in a year or more then there's not enough interest in it to make it worth while to replace it.

[Wendigo]

I've been re-upping to Imagebam but as others have said IV does keep the file name which is handy when posting random images so I will look at using a mix of both.

No doubt some dupes will occur as old images are replaced but it's far better to have threads with a few dupe images than a host of dead images.

[bigbobnobody]

I really don't understand the point of uploading to two different pic hosts,
with one as a "backup". I mean if you have that many pictures, that you feel
that you need a backup for them, then I'd certainly think that one would be
anal enough to keep backups of them "offline" as well. And if you've done that,
then it's no more work uploading whichever ones need re-uploading, than it
is to search thru one's online backup.....and most likely a helluva lot easier
finding a pic on your computer than it would be in either site's folder system.
Posting two pics of the exact same picture is supposed to be against VEF
rules anyways. VEF isn't the storage system...it's the display system. How
hard can it be to throw 40 gazillion pics on a DVD if you're worried about
space on your computer? Ultimately.....a person is going to have to depend
on themselves, rather than throw the whole responsibility, on to a free pic host
I'd think.

[buttsie]

This has nothing to do with back-ups but everything to do with keeping posts ALIVE
so anyone looking can see what set / clip etc is in it

This malicious attack is at the extreme end of the spectrum which harkens back to the bad old days

Imagebam was down for 6 weeks of Maintenance about 5-7 years ago

Pimpandhost - server issues for months - images inaccessible - thumbs disappearing

Imagevenue has intermittent outages - this malicious attack probably aimed at them because so many think of them as the best

All hosts have downtime but its on these occasions when the thumbs disappear that its at its worst
because you cant tell whats been posted - makes avoiding duplication impossible



2 hosts for a clip

example - IV even before the malicious attack had an outage where all the thumbs disappeared - re-upped different ones to IB

Offering different sized thumbs can serve different purposes
2x2 to show a scene with a few snippets and the 4x4+ to show the entire scene.
Media player classic makes them very easily

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...6&postcount=50


Occasionally some imagehost ban images so you have no choice but to use 2

3 images on IV 27 images on IB

All 30 could easily be posted on both hosts gallery links to both added
but that would be overkill given the interest of the pornstar in question

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...&postcount=130


People can do as they wish but the old adage of putting all your eggs in basket has never been truer

I dont as a default always offer 2 options but treat every post on its merit

I'd think for those with filehost links caps / pics on 2 imagehosts would have been useful