This document compares different photo sharing options available in 2008, including Flickr, Picasa, Facebook, SmugMug, Me.com, Photobucket, Kodak Gallery, Shutterfly, Webshots, Snapfish and Phanfare Gallery. It notes that Flickr and Picasa had established strong communities and creative features, but Flickr was somewhat complicated and not integrated into other main systems, while Picasa required a desktop client. Facebook allowed for easy photo sharing integrated within its social network but was only a secondary service.

1. Photo Sharing Options in 2008

2. Photo Printing Kodak Gallery Shutterfly Social Sharing Flickr Picasa

3. Flickr Picasa Facebook SmugMug Me.com Photobucket Kodak Shutterfly Webshots Snapfish Phanfare Gallery

4. Flickr Picasa Facebook SmugMug Me.com Photobucket Kodak Shutterfly Webshots Snapfish Phanfare Gallery

5. Established Strong Community Features

7. Pros: active community, groups creative commons RSS feeds Cons: somewhat complicated not integrated into system that you might otherwise use (Google, Facebook, etc)

9. Pros: face recognition creative commons integrates with Google products Cons: requires a desktop client 1 GB storage with free account

11. Pros: easy to use integrated with Facebook community Cons: secondary service image quality

12. readwriteweb.com/archives/ photo_sharing_round_up.php