or why the Jebediah photoblog image is so small

One of the reasons I started the photoblog, was to experiment with the various web based photo applications, to find one I was going to use for the next couple of years. I had to start playing with one app, so I started with zooomr. Why because I had to start somewhere and zooomr are offering a free upgrade to a pro account to bloggers, who display their images hosted on zooomr with the tag line hosted on zooomr.

On the surface zooomr is very similar to flickr and I have noticed a few differences in the first few days: audio notations (I would not use), smart sets based on your tags, Google maps for geo tagging (a big plus!). One big difference is behind the scenes in the compression used on photos uploaded to zooomr, I originally uploaded a 300k 1200x1600px image only to be presented with a choice of either a 600k 768x1024px or 300k 375x500px image to display on my website, similar images from flickr are 200k at 768x1024px.

While I can see the advantages from a photographers point of view, the image displayed will be higher quaility and less likely to suffer from compression artifice on zooomr than flickr. However, I live in country were most people are still on dial up at home (I am) and those on broadband are punished either financially (up to 10c a Mb) or have their connection speeds severly restricted if they exceed their monthly limit. So I did not want to have 600k images on every page of my photoblog.

I tried uploading a 200k 768x1024px image to zooomr, however it returned a 600k image at the same dimensions. It was only after I got my Pro account at zooomr I found that I could access the original image I uploaded (note: flickr is the same, you need to upload from a Pro account to access the original image). This does defeat part of the purpose of photosharing application if you have prepared the image, both in dimensions and compression before you upload it, if you want to display the image on a website.

One advantage flickr has over zooomr is the number of third party tools available (ie WordPress plugins). In theory you should be able to substitue zooomr’s API calls for flickr’s and get the same results, but I have yet to test this.

zooomr does offer a little to me in a different interface higher quality compression ratio and better local mapping than flickr. The free pro account was an incentive to use zooomr, however as I have had a few problems connecting to the zooomr in the past couple of days, I am unlikely to continue.

Update 19 January the actual difference in compression is discussed in my next post zooomr and flickr part 2

One Response to “Zooomr.com”

  1. Nick Cowie » zooomr and flickr part 2 Says:

    In my previous post on zooomr, I mentioned there was a difference in the level of compression used by flickr and zooomr. I now know that is not the case, the difference is that if you upload a standard size (ie 1024px x 768px) to flickr, flickr will not reprocessed the image and will use the image as you uploaded it. So if you uploaded a 200k image at 1024px x 768px, the image available at the large size will be 200k …