Trading Card Bucket

[Mike]

Everywhere I look photobucket seems to be the choice amongst collectors for storing their trading card photos. However, I've considered building an alternative, for collectors, that is tailored just for trading cards. It would have multiple options that could be selected, for each card uploaded, that would make organizing and browsing those buckets a lot simpler.

I've got some ideas that I think would work, but would you use it? I'd like to make sure there is some interest in it, and that it would be used, before spending hundreds of hours building it.

So, let's hear from other collectors.

 

[Cool_Hand_Flash]

Well, Im with you 100%, but you already knew that lol

Honestly, Im tired of photobucket, reeeal tired.. others are too. And if a simple, non bs site came that could organise the pics for you easily, then a lot of people would prefer that.. I hope lol

 

[franklinguy52]

I think that collectors would love a site that is set up specifically for the purpose of showing off their cards. It would be nice to have pre-setup with catagories,etc. so that it would be easy to check out what everybidy has.

 

[captkirk42]

I agree. Photobucket has gotten too NON User friendly. To find what is in your sub-albums you have to be in "edit pics" mode and then you still need to click 3 or 4 times to see what is in the sub-albums.

 

[Mike]

Thanks for the replies, guys. What are some things that y'all feel are "must haves" for the new site?

 

[Mike]

In the next few weeks I'll be looking for beta testers to help test out new features as they're added. If you're interested in helping, please start a private conversation with me and let me know.

 

[Cool_Hand_Flash]

Thanks for the replies, guys. What are some things that y'all feel are "must haves" for the new site?

Well, easily being able to categorise would be my number one thing. So other people can sort by gu, auto etc. Some people arent very good at organising, and even people who are, can have a tough time with photobucket. And maybe an option for the site to auto-reduce the size to a preset size, maybe three diff sizes or something. It would save a lot of peeps a lot of time, especially case/group breakers with tons of scans

 

[Jeremy]

I also agree photobucket has taken a turn for the worst however here's a friendly warning Mike. I created something similar a while back for a graphics/web forum I belong to because we wanted a private alternative to already existing photo sharing sites. We ran through bandwidth like a trekker drinking water in the dessert. We started with a cheap Dedi from ovh and constantly had to upgrade. We ended up with a mid $xxx server from lease web. After around six months we made members pay a small fee to use it, which they did but it was a pain to maintain, being we all had full time jobs, side jobs and were mods in various places.

There is a "Need' for what you're proposing. No doubt about it! I just wouldn't put that strain on your current VPS. I dont want to be a Debbie downer. Ive thought about it but it will take some capital from members. Photobucket colo's a private suite here: http://www.latisys.com/data-center/colocation/private-suite.html I'm sure their monthly invoices is in the high $xx,xxx.

You may want to look into some of the unlimited servers at ovh.com. Future Hosting will suspend the VPS if the new site causes it to use 20% or more of the VPS's CPU. Additionally, you may want to submit a ticket before you begin coding and make sure image hosting is okay with them. Some host will give you a hard time about it unless you're on a dedi.

If you're serious I'll help in any way I can. Just know, it wont be a breeze brother.

 

[Mike]

Yeah, it will definitely not go live on my current server. It will get its own, from where I'm still not sure. I'm not too worried about the CPU usage. Since I'm writing it from the ground up I'll be able to test all of the code and use alternative ****ods where necessary. I'm not looking to do anything nearly as processor intensive as what Photobucket does either (photo cropping, resizing, etc), especially at first. My main concern, which you brought up, is the bandwidth. However, I would impose bandwidth limits on a per user basis. I'm sure most members can easily fit under a 1-2GB/month cap, and those who can't will have the option to upgrade (for a small fee of course), or keep using Photobucket.

I don't see this turning into anything of quite the magnitude of Photobucket. It will be a very simple, and easy to use, alternative.

Also, I'm sure I'll be able to use all the help I can get.

 

[Jeremy]

Yeah, it will definitely not go live on my current server. It will get its own, from where I'm still not sure. I'm not too worried about the CPU usage. Since I'm writing it from the ground up I'll be able to test all of the code and use alternative ****ods where necessary. I'm not looking to do anything nearly as processor intensive as what Photobucket does either (photo cropping, resizing, etc), especially at first. My main concern, which you brought up, is the bandwidth. However, I would impose bandwidth limits on a per user basis. I'm sure most members can easily fit under a 1-2GB/month cap, and those who can't will have the option to upgrade (for a small fee of course), or keep using Photobucket.

I don't see this turning into anything of quite the magnitude of Photobucket. It will be a very simple, and easy to use, alternative.

Also, I'm sure I'll be able to use all the help I can get.

I was just playing the Devil's advocate. Someone must.

I'm more than confident you'll knock this out of the park, should you decide to take it on.

 

[Jeremy]

Feel free to PM me if you'd like help with a logo for the new site.
If not, no worries.

 

[Mike]

Feel free to PM me if you'd like help with a logo for the new site.
If not, no worries.

Actually, I'll do exactly that.

 

[redwing40]

I hate photobucket, so I will try it!