whatstefansees

Flickr has become the World Photo Archive by now. It has gone through a few hands and is pretty stable since the McAskill family bought it in 2018.

• pro: there is no "more relevant photo archive" because of the sheer numbers and variety. You may say: "yeah, but most of that is family and holiday shots taken on phone-cameras" and you're right. But that's what documenting life really is about. Nothing else is as complete. And the number of EXCELLENT photographers showing and archiving their shots on Flickr is incredible, too
• con: you only reach people who are somewhat into photography. Flickr isn't IG, no random passer-by will stumble over a shot of yours and you can't really advertise your portfolio. Most Flickr members really are there for their own work before looking at yours. That only changes when you are interested enough in photography to spend time on other photographer's pictures, in searching through groups and galleries.

I have a pro account and so far about 110 million hits on my work (around 70'000 per day in average 2023) - it's a clear indication that there are A LOT of people on Flickr and interested in photography

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stefanschmitz/

Phone. it's probably a lot better than what you an get for 30 bucks on te used camera market

Very interesting read. Thanks

That 300 dpi is a bit of a legend and not really necessary.

• first read this https://www.claremon.co.uk/what-is-dpi-in-printing/
• Then you must understand that the necessary or optimum resolution is very much depending on the distance the beholder stands from the print. Any legal or A4 sized print will mostly be looked at from a distance of 50 cm or 18 inches. A door-sized print that covers a huge wall, say 6' by 4' or 180*120 cm will probably be looked at from a distance of 2m / 7' at least. So there is no need.
• Rule of thumb: If you halve the distance, you must square the number of pixels (double vertically and double horizontally = square)
• I have a number of prints in 90*60 cm (3 feet by 2) and a number of 120*80 cm (four feet by 2 1/2 or 48 by 32 inches) on my walls. They are printed in 160 and 128 dpi and they look perfectly sharp and not the least pixelated out of a 24 MP camera. The bigger ones hang on a wall behind/over a sofa/couch, so you can't really get closer than maybe 1,20m or 4' except if you climb and stand on that sofa.
• In short: the necessary resolution depends on the distance of the beholder as much as on the print size. The smaller the photo, the closer people get their noses ove the print and the finer the resolution should be.

Disclaimer: I know that 50 cm aren't 18" and 2m aren't 7' - but those numbers are close enough and we all can imagine them without a second thought, so I ... went for "the next best number"

8 actually know a woman who shoots 'penis portraits' she says the clients often want a very explicit and close up shot for use on fetish encounter sites.

There is a market for everything ...

Take the best shot, then add grain in post