Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmonegro | Hacker News Reader

365.io was created specifically for Project 365, which is a year-long photography project in which you upload a picture a day for 365 days so that after a year you have some sort of photo documentary of your life over that year.

The main difference between this and a Flickr stream is the focus. Flickr is meant for photography in general, and while you could use it for Project 365, it's less organized and focused. For example, your P 365 entries would be mixed in with your regular flickr uploads.

View on HN

That's why you put them in a set.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thwarted/sets/72157623777255069...

This is from a 20 line shell script that takes a picture at some random time within a minute after I unlock the screensaver. They are then uploaded manually using kflickr because, honestly, some of them come out really crappy (out of focus/blurry) and I unlock my computer like a 100 times a day.

Clever! Can you share the script? I have something similar, but my computer takes a picture every 20 minutes or so and uploads them to my server ( http://lishin.org/pavelcam.jpg ), overwriting the previous one.

(To answer the inevitable question, yeah, it's caught me naked a few times.)

I cleaned up the code and put it up at https://github.com/thwarted/picsofourlives

Maybe I slightly exaggerated on the size. It's a 14 line shell script and a 57 line perl script. Anyway, it's small. Requires xscreensaver and mplayer and a working USB camera.

That's what I interpret Flickr groups to be - a way to focus on a given subject rather than photography in general.

You need to prove the value of your product before you can start charging users $11. Your frontpage gives no indication of the value added.

We feel Project 365 is more personal than flickr would allow you through groups.

Regardless, thanks for the feedback.

Agreed about Flickr groups.

> You need to prove the value of your product before you can start charging users $11

Disagree about this. It's obvious what the offering is, so let the user decide if it's worth $11 to them. The expectation of value is set by defining the price point.

Well, it's also not clear what being "more organized and focused" gives you too. It doesn't seem worth 11 bucks. I think you need an obvious distinction to be able to get people to pay up. On the other hand, I love the design.

And the $11? ~100Gb of transfer on S3?

Storage + bandwidth + hosting + assorted costs (maintenance, backups, email, etc.), all for a year + profit

Why not automagically host the files on Flickr, saving you costs of storage & bandwidth?

I'll second that question but also point out that it probably would make even less sense to charge for the service.

Wouldn't there be anything in Flickr's ToS that would prevent third party developers from hosting their app's photos there? I like the suggestion though.

Yes. From Flickr: "The direct link to a photo file is no longer shown on the page. Per the Flickr Community Guidelines "pages on other websites that display content hosted on flickr.com must provide a link from each photo or video back to its page on Flickr." Linking directly to the photo file doesn't do this."

I think a desktop and/or mobile software for P 360 would make more sense than an online solution. It could simply integrate with people's Flickr accounts and get out of the way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com