I want to host some pictures at low cost (less than flickr). I have come across Shareapic and Imgur. However, imagur strips the meta-data off of uploaded images, and I couldn't find much information on shareapic. Note: I want to retain ownership of my photos so Picasa web-upload won't work.

closed as too broad by mattdm, John Cavan Dec 3 '13 at 0:38

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    You are mistaken about Picassa. Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Picasa Web Albums. picasa.google.com/intl/en-GB/web/tos.html – mattdm May 14 '11 at 15:55
  • 1
    By submitting, posting or displaying Content which is intended to be available to the general public, you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, distribute and publish such Content for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services. – Dale May 14 '11 at 16:32
  • 1
    That just grants Google use of the image for something, I would wager any albums set as private wouldn't be used. Nobody else would use them, but I imagine it would cover their ability to return them in search results and so on... Flickr is so cheap though, I can't see why you wouldn't just go with that. – JamWheel May 14 '11 at 16:47
  • 5
    ...especially as Flickr can be completely free... – Rowland Shaw May 14 '11 at 17:11
  • 7
    That isn't giving up ownership, though. Some of those rights are needed just to be ae to host and dismay the photos. The advertising-use clause isn't something I like, but it's still not giving up ownership. Also, all of those terminate if you remove the images. – mattdm May 14 '11 at 17:14

I recommend Flickr. You can even choose Creative Commons licenses to assign to photos based on what licensing rights you want to permit.




I use Fotki - less known than some but flexible enough and reasonable features and CHEAP.

You can set licence rights of your choice - they offer various variants of GPL and you can add your own in several says. I use non-commercial use only, no derivates, attribtution and suggest people email me. That does not stop copying but allows you to retain rights. You can password and/or hide albums etc.

In your account settings it says: Copyright holder:
Set the default copyright message for your account.
It can be overridden for a particular album or photo

From memory cost is about $US/10 per year if you buy a few years for unlimited storage, high resolution photos (may have a 10 MB limit?) . I think there is a 2 GB/day upload limit. Supports FTP an slideshows (and I seem to know more slideshow settings than any one else in public as I played and then asked them). All up its very good.

I have 90 GB and 119,000+ photos on Fotki at present. That's 'acceptable' [tm] for $10/year.
Here j.mp/NZPHOTOS

They offer album per photo view, thumbnails, slideshow and a very nice roll view like this - roll down - do not click until you see a photo you want to interact with in some manner.


I'm not exactly sure what your needs are, but if you are just looking for raw storage, try Amazon's/AWS Simple Storage Service.

It's primarily a paid service, but they have a FREE plan that will start you with 5GB of storage 15 GB transfer out / monthly.


You'll need to read over the page thoroughly to get a sense of what they offer and how they work, but for what they offer, I think they are worth the effort.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.