|
|
|
|
|
by decode
5975 days ago
|
|
> I went to Costa Rica with three other friends. At the end of the trip each of us had about 1GB of photos. [...] The entire process was cumbersome and took about an hour. This means that each person "uploaded" 1GB of data and "downloaded" 3GB of data. In total, 16 GB of data was transferred. Doing this manually via USB drive is about an order of magnitude faster than over your average broadband Internet connection. It's not clear to me that Divvyshot has solved the problem here. > I never ended up getting that group photo - even though low resolution copies of it tantalize me on Facebook. I was surprised to realize several years ago that one of Facebook's greatest contributions to my life was that it completely solved the photo sharing problem and had done it so well that I didn't even notice. Now I get everyone's photos from every event, I get notified when they're uploaded, and it seems like everyone I know can use it without problems. Sure, I wish it supported higher resolutions, but the medium-res images are good enough for 95% of people. If they would just allow slightly higher resolutions, then it would be perfect for almost all of my needs. |
|
Where did you get 95%? I've heard this before yet I don't know of anyone (besides us) who's actually taken the time to ask users if med-res is good enough.
When founding Divvyshot I used Amazon mechanical turk to conduct a quick market survey (with hundreds of respondents). A few highlights:
77% of respondents knew what hi-resolution photos were and preferred them.
43% had manually increased the resolution setting on their camera.
77% had been promised photos from a social event within the last few months and had never received them.