« Tearing Down the Wall at the NYTimes.com |
Main
| Hyperlocal Advertising Relies on Geolocation »
Does Flickr Image Hosting Hurt Blog Traffic?
In recent months, I've switched over to using Flickr for image hosting for
Technology Evangelist rather than hosting the images on the TE server. This has
some advantages which I'l outline below, but also may have a disadvantage worth considering.
First the advantages:
Here is my general work flow for inserting images into a Technology Evangelist
post:
1. I see something interesting on a web site that's post worthy.
2. I click Cmd-Shift-4, then highlight the relevant area of my screen. This
creates a cropped screen shot on my desktop.
3. I ctrl-click on the image, and open it with Flickr Uploadr, give it a name
and tags, then post it to Flickr.
4. I open the photo on Flickr and grab the HTML for the 500px wide or narrower
version of the photo or screen shot. Flickr automatically resizes images to a
few set sizes, making it easy for me to grab an appropriate size for the blog.
They also store the original so people can click on the inserted image to study
a larger version.
The disadvantage:
By hosting the images on Flickr rather than the TE server, I missed out on
traffic from image-specific searches from sites like Google Images. This can be
a significant portion of a site's traffic when images are properly names and
given ALT text, so it's with some reluctance that I use the work-flow described
above.
To make up for this, I try to make a habit of adding a link from my Flickr
image's descriptions to posts where they've been embedded in order to drive a
little traffic to a page that explains what they're all about. This has proven
to drive enough traffic to justify the time involved in adding links.
What is your theory on image hosting for blogs? Do you host your own images, use
Flickr, Amazon S3, or some other 3rd party host? What is the thinking behind
your choice?
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://technologyevangelist.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.fcgi/1107
2. Posted by: Chris E. Avis on August 14, 2007 12:12 AM:
"By hosting the images on Flickr rather than the TE server, I missed out on traffic from image-specific searches from sites like Google Images."
Why are you "missing out" on the traffic? I see relatively little advertising on your site compared to some blogs. I understand missing the revenue, but I am still boggled by why bloggers worship the "hit count gods"... I suppose there is some validation in knowing that thousands or hundreds of thousands of people read a blog but I get jazzed if I get an email once every 6 months (I get a lot more). Of course I am not blogging for advertising dollars so I suppose I have a different perspective....
Chris
3. Posted by: Ed Kohler on August 14, 2007 8:57 AM:
Interesting point, Brendan. But get this: Google Images was the #2 referring site to Technology Evangelist in July. Second only to Google's web search. People coming through from Images are relevant to the site's content since they're looking for images related to what's written about on the site. The time per visitor isn't as high as from web search referrals but it's pretty good.
I see search referrals as an opportunity to introduce our content to a new visitor.
S3 seems to be gaining a lot of traction among bloggers. That's something I'm only starting to explore.
Chris, I manage more than one blog. Some have ad models. Some are just for fun. Regardless, I like to be read by as many people as possible.
4. Posted by: benjain on July 12, 2008 3:16 PM:
You can also try pic4us
Free Image Hosting Service - Pic4us
is online again and open
http://www.pic4.us
Pictures For Us is a free gallery and easy to use pictures and images hosting service. You are welcome to use our simple form to upload your photos, images, and videos and share them with other people on the Web. For uploading your photos and pictures, please use our free registration service to open an account and start creating your own images and photos gallery.
5. Posted by: Daniel on July 29, 2008 7:03 PM:
A fairly new free image hosting site is http://www.imgir.com . It's really easy to use and easy to share. Check them out.
6. Posted by: jolian on December 2, 2008 6:04 AM:
I also use that site : Pic4us
I find it layout easy and simple to use:
http://www.pic4.us/
7. Posted by: Hosting on October 7, 2009 4:51 AM:
Keep up the great work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here!
8. Posted by: Alex on April 6, 2010 9:07 AM:
Wow, thanks for great Information. Personally, I am using http://www.picturegood.com, They have never deleted my pictures so far. It's been a pleasure for me to be with them for 7 months, they look good and not overcrowded like other hosts.
9. Posted by: free image uploads on May 1, 2010 6:20 AM:
you r providing grt info.... I am using photodekho.co and i easily upload my photos without any intruption or error and they also never delete my photos and its a free site with no space limit....
| 
1. Posted by: Brendan on August 13, 2007 11:09 PM:
Images themselves really don't do anything 'positive' for traffic.
Indeed I've actually offloaded a lot stuff to Amazon's S3 to improve performance.
It's 'quality' of incoming traffic that is frequently more relevant, over raw quantity. Linking to flickr hosted images in a blog post will still drive traffic (by people actually visiting the parent link).
And most half decent statistics softwares will track outgoing links, so one can get a good feel for where people are going.
Good content will always drive traffic - indeed it makes a great deal of sense in balancing the processing load across multiple resources.
It's pretty evident that if content is good, people will visit and read, irrespective of where any imagery might be hosted.