There is a site where a couple of gigabytes of photos. To reduce the network load on the server, it was decided to transfer the photos to image hosting. They offered flickr, but after a superficial acquaintance with him, it became clear that he squeezes the resolution of photos, and it will be very difficult to regenerate links to new images. What can you advise?
Closed due to the fact that it is necessary to reformulate the question so that it was possible to give an objectively correct answer by the participants aleksandr barakin , zRrr , VenZell , Mike , Streletz 21 May '16 at 7:46 .
The question gives rise to endless debates and discussions based not on knowledge, but on opinions. To get an answer, rephrase your question so that it can be given an unambiguously correct answer, or delete the question altogether. If the question can be reformulated according to the rules set out in the certificate , edit it .
- Are you sure that he is going through? I really did not test at a very high resolution, but everything seems to be fine. Plus you can get a direct link. - Yura Shinkarev
|
3 answers
Look at the imgur (it hashcode). Pictures - up to 5 MB. The number of pictures is unlimited. There is inexpensive - about 700 rubles per year.
stanislav stanislav
29.5k 20 74 191
|
To do this, you can use only commercial services such as Amazon S3, cloudflare or any CDN. No free image hosting will agree to use its resources for such purposes.
|
If you do not need any special bells and whistles, try http://piccy.info/
Deonis deonis
32.3k one 24 45
- Wonderful service, entered, entered the captcha and saw it:> 403 Forbidden> (banned)> 2388800545395080133404432234706 - northerner
- yeah ... either I was stupid or didn’t advise what to do ... - greshnik
|