From your blog:
"Users will have to download them, or use Flickr or Facebook to store these photos. This decision was made because I’m poor and don’t have the money for the massive bandwidth for server side photo hosting."
Don't apologize for this, it's the right option.
- Leverage the tools people already use and are used to.
- Save the users some work. The way photos are shared today is through sites like flickr, allowing the output to uploaded directly saves the user the step of doing it themselves.
- Uploading to popular services serves to increase awareness of your app. Including a plea to get people to "spread the word about where they generated the image" can help this too.
- Not making it easy to send the output directly to popular services potentially creates a walled-garden effect, and may make your tool more a single-shot gee-wiz-isn't-this-neat visit, rather than something that encourages people to come back because it's so easy to do what they would have anyway.
- By allowing people to save the images to their local drive and send to other services, you communicate that you are not trying to lock them in. This is one of the worst sins, if not the worst, you can commit in this post-web-2.0 world of integrated and aggregated services and user generated content. I hate sites that try to drive traffic back to themselves for no obvious user benefit (evite, and "greeting card" sites come to mind).