Download |WORK| Images From Flickr

Flickr is a good source of photographs that have been licensed under Creative Commons. Images licensed under Creative Commons are still subject to copyright, but the creator or copyright owner has chosen to allow other people to use their material under certain conditions. Depending on which licence is attached, Creative Commons images can be freely used in teaching material, as part of research publications, on blogs, wikis and other websites, in University publications and in MOOCs. Not all photographs on Flickr are available under a Creative Commons licence, so this guide explains how to limit your search to Creative Commons material.

All Creative Commons licences require that you attribute the images that you use. There are specific requirements regarding the attribution of copyright material - your citation should include the title of the work, name of the creator, a link to the website where the image is hosted and the type of Creative Commons licence applicable to the work. If the creator has requested that they are attributed in a particular way you should try and follow their request. If you are using the image in print or digitally without hyperlinks, your attribution should include the text of the URLs.

Download Images From Flickr

Download 🔥 https://urluss.com/2y2G0S 🔥

I have some photographs of 50 megapixel size saved as 16-bit-per-channel PNG. The file size is between 150 megabytes and 200 megabytes. If the size is greater than 200 megs then I shrink the photo to get it under that limit. I upload using the "new" Uploadr page at www.flickr.com/photos/upload/

Normally uploading such files is slow, but works. My Internet connection has a theoretical speed of one gigabit per second and in practice the photo is transferred to Flickr's servers in about ten seconds. That's the time it takes for the little circle to move round and become "full" in the Uploadr page. On a slow connection you can see time-outs before the file has uploaded, but that's not what happens here.

Instead, the circle completes and changes to the Flickr red and blue dots moving from side to side. I believe this indicates the file has been uploaded and is now being processed on Flickr's servers. But it doesn't complete; after about thirty seconds it changes to "This file failed to upload".

I can retry and retry -- each retry uploads the file again (which succeeds, at least according to the circle progress indicator) but then times out on the red and blue dots. Perhaps with a lot of luck I might get one image to be processed after retrying several times, but most of the larger ones are simply stuck. Smaller images (say 50 to 100 megabytes) work a bit better, and might require only one or two retries.

I can't help feeling that this behaviour is not helping Flickr any more than it helps me. By having to retry and retry I am uploading the image again and again, eating bandwidth, and also putting extra load on the servers as they try to process the upload before getting timed out.

Please could you increase the timeout period? It ought to be enough time to upload and process a large (nearly 200 megabyte) image.

(I have also tried the Windows Uploadr application, but that didn't work any better. Larger photos simply failed without trace and it managed to upload only the smaller ones.)

Edit: Resolved as of 22:45 UTC - October 3rd, 2023.

Posted at 12:13PM, 2 October 2023 PST(permalink)

Wilson Lam {WLQ} (staff) edited this topic 3 months ago.

cabb88:

This is devastating, had to be my favourite thing on the internet, no hyperbole.

Please tell me the metadata was backed up before the account was deleted? In theory the images are still somewhere in the internet archive (not in a browsable form).. but all the time people spent exploring the 5 million plus images and favouriting them + adding them to galleries, just gone?

Even just the view counts for each image would allow the most popular images to be found again..

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

cabb88:

I just find it so hard to imagine that the issue of loss of irrecoverable data would not have been discussed as part of that conversation, and why warning users of the imminent deletion of their galleries would not have been considered.

Are there any backups that might contain the IDs of images users previously referenced in their galleries?

Is there any way we would could get a list of IDs of images that at some point had been favourited by any user?

Are these questions that could be posed to the dev team?

Is there anyone in particular in the Internet Archive organisation that I could reach out to?

I have a backup of all the data provided by the Flickr API before the account was deleted, so that would allow mapping flickr IDs back to the corresponding source material.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

Personally speaking, I was a fan of the quirky nature of the Internet Archive's images on Flickr. While the material is almost certainly preserved on their own servers, removing it from Flickr removes the ability to interact with it here in this community.

While I can see how some might find it unwelcome in their search results, there is a tool in search to "temporarily hide all photos from this person" that a user could use.

I would have rather Flickr (and still think Flickr should) improve our search by giving us the ability to "PERMANENTLY hide all photos from this person" in search, over deleting 5 million images. This sort of a tool would do such a better job of fixing unwanted search results.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

cabb88:

This is a heartbreaking loss! This was the only way to find individual photos from archive.org, and you've just deleted it?!

I don't care if this was in agreement with them, this wasn't thought through! Think of the thousands upon thousands of annotations, comments, extensions of the data, knowledge added.

If the reasoning is that the images mostly weren't photos, what's going to happen to the Biodiversity Heritage Library account?! Most of that is illustration!

The destruction of knowledge here is unfathomable, shame on you, Flickr!

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

cabb88:

Please, before it's too late, can there please be some attempt at saving the data? Making a backup or something available? You've also destroyed all the thousands og galleries people have made with these images, and like someone else said above, these users have no chance of knowing what was in those galleries now.

This has to be undone, at the very least temporarily. I can't even begin to understand how you thought this was a good idea.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

A tiny silver lining - for anyone who has a now-dead link to an image that used to be in the Internet Archive Book Images account, try putting the URL into the Wayback Machine at archive.org (paradoxically), e.g.:

web.archive.org/web/20160708090538/

As shown in this example, the metadata is still there, meaning there is a way to figure out both what the image was, and which book it was from.

Of course, this doesn't help any of the thousands of galleries now devastated by this ham-fisted attempt at saving money, one presumes. Unless maybe those can be put into the Wayback Machine, too... worth a shot!

web.archive.org/

EIDT: I've done some more testing of this, and it only works on a few of the links I have saved. So not a very good option, although still worth a shot.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

@nightgolfer edited this topic 21 months ago.

@nightgolfer:

Thank you for sharing this workaround.

The Internet Archive took the steps to delete their account not just because these were book images that were not suited for the Flickr Commons, but also because the account had been dormant and not maintained for several years.

We've shared this thread with the folks at the Internet Archive but in the meantime, we also recommend reaching out to them directly if anyone has questions about where these images might be stored in the future.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

@nightgolfer:

Well spotted. For some reason I just assumed that way back machine would be a non-starter because of the sheer number of items.

I'm going to see how far I can get with the API to see how many item pages are archived, and then try to scrape it to get a list of the most popular images.

Posted 21 months ago.( permalink)

cabb88:

but also because the account had been dormant and not maintained for several years.

I do think that there is value in having dormant collections of images on Flickr. In fact everyone who dies and leaves behind their body of work and archive theoretically becomes a dormant account (Flickr Forever, and all that). That doesn't seem to be a particularly strong argument for removing the content, although I do understand that this is their choice at the end of the day and not Flickr's. I'm just wondering if they fully thought out this decision before making it. Things also can change in the future and you never know, they may have a volunteer or someone in the future who might want to pick up the maintenance of their account again.

Perhaps they did not feel as welcome and included (given the argument about book images) and just thought, eh, sure, who cares, we're not really working with it these days without recognizing that some in the Flickr community (who are also big fans of the Internet Archive) might care more than Flickr or the Internet Archive themselves.

In terms of the previously stated issue about search. It would be pretty easy for Flickr to NIPSA the account (or perhaps NIPSA it only in the Commons Search) if that was really so much of an issue. Although I'd argue that being able to see the search results in search is a good thing not a bad thing even if Flickr's algorithm ranked these items lower in search.

These days I've been focusing a lot on vernacular photography myself (found photographs) a tradition in the photograph arts well recognized by more and more museums and cultural institutions. I know that in researching some of the names, items, locations of some of these photographs, that I've come across the most obscure results in the past that have come from images in the Internet Archive's collection at Flickr. In fact, it's really the massiveness and the breadth of their collection that added the most value, given that sometimes they were one of the few accounts who might end up indexing some of the most obscure content.

I'm assuming that with the clock rolling they are still within their 90 day window to restore their account should they wish to make this decision. I hope they do reconsider that many in this community did care about that material and elect to restore their account. Thanks for sending them this link so that they can at least consider how some might feel about what they'd published here.

I do think it is also worth mentioning that by deleting their account they also permanently erased all the social meta data that was created while it was alive (comments, galleries, group discussions, forums, favorites, etc.). I would be surprised that a cultural institution like the Internet Archive would not care more about the social construction (data, knowledge) by others that went on around their images on Flickr. I'd also think that to the extent that any of their images were blogged, embedded, etc. across the broader internet that creating more broken links would be a negative as well.