<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="b2evolution/3.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Work While Drunk - Latest comments on A little rant about Flickr</title>
		<link>http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/?disp=comments</link>
		<atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/?tempskin=_rss2&#38;disp=comments&#38;p=33" />
		<description></description>
		<language>en-UK</language>
		<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://b2evolution.net/?v=3.3.2"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
				<item>
			<title>NightSpirit [Visitor] in response to: A little rant about Flickr</title>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:55:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NightSpirit [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c45@http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/</guid>
			<description>When I first read that I thought that 500MB would easily be enough but then checked out the Photos dir on my HD and it comes to 1.1GB for only 46 sets :/ However, that does include some avi files that were taken at the same time too which pushes up the size taken. Also, some of the photos are very hi-res which probably would not really be needed on an online gallery - saving down to a reasonable 1024x768 size drops the filesize down to 10%.With that in mind you wouldn't need to worry about the quota until you hit 80 sets or so (depending on how much you post in the rest of the blog). &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Obviously tho it will depend on your plans for the images.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[When I first read that I thought that 500MB would easily be enough but then checked out the Photos dir on my HD and it comes to 1.1GB for only 46 sets :/ However, that does include some avi files that were taken at the same time too which pushes up the size taken. Also, some of the photos are very hi-res which probably would not really be needed on an online gallery - saving down to a reasonable 1024x768 size drops the filesize down to 10%.With that in mind you wouldn't need to worry about the quota until you hit 80 sets or so (depending on how much you post in the rest of the blog). <br />
<br />
Obviously tho it will depend on your plans for the images.]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/2006/08/13/a_little_rant_about_flickr#c45</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>fraser [Member] in response to: A little rant about Flickr</title>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>fraser [Member]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c44@http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/</guid>
			<description>I originally looked at Gallery, and a few others, but decided that FlickR was much more feature rich. Despite its shortcoming, and my rant above, I still think its the best out there and a truly great site/application. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The biggest concern for me is the storage space. I have about 500Mb of hosting space, and a self-hosted gallery would eat into that in no time Doubling that to 1Gb would cost me an extra &amp;#163;20 a year, so FlickR's &amp;#163;15 a year starts to look reasonable - especially considering I'm essentially buying use of their software too.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I plan to do some work with the FlickR API in the near future, to see how well I can get it to integrate with my B2Evo setup... so based on that outcome, I'll decide if I'm buying into it or not.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I originally looked at Gallery, and a few others, but decided that FlickR was much more feature rich. Despite its shortcoming, and my rant above, I still think its the best out there and a truly great site/application. <br />
<br />
The biggest concern for me is the storage space. I have about 500Mb of hosting space, and a self-hosted gallery would eat into that in no time Doubling that to 1Gb would cost me an extra &#163;20 a year, so FlickR's &#163;15 a year starts to look reasonable - especially considering I'm essentially buying use of their software too.<br />
<br />
I plan to do some work with the FlickR API in the near future, to see how well I can get it to integrate with my B2Evo setup... so based on that outcome, I'll decide if I'm buying into it or not.]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/2006/08/13/a_little_rant_about_flickr#c44</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>NightSpirit [Visitor] in response to: A little rant about Flickr</title>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:07:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>NightSpirit [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c42@http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/</guid>
			<description>That's not good :( I guess they have to make their money somehow tho. I read that there is a Gallery plugin for b2evo in the works but might be a while before it turns into a useable replacement. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
You could always try a seperate standalone package and run it beside b2evo on this hosting account?</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[That's not good :( I guess they have to make their money somehow tho. I read that there is a Gallery plugin for b2evo in the works but might be a while before it turns into a useable replacement. <br />
<br />
You could always try a seperate standalone package and run it beside b2evo on this hosting account?]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://www.workwhiledrunk.com/2006/08/13/a_little_rant_about_flickr#c42</link>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
