All projects: Gel, Good Todo, Games, Uncle Mark, Bit Literacy
Where not to put the most important link... on Flickr
I've never understood why I have to hunt around to post a photo on Flickr. Uploading photos on Flickr is like writing a post on Twitter, or typing a search query on Google - it's the lifeblood of the entire service.
Imagine if the "New tweet" function on Twitter was hidden away in a submenu, 12 options down from the top. That's where Flickr has put its most important link:
Someone needs to hire Creative Good!
Update March 23: Several readers in the comments and on Twitter pointed out that I left out the Upload link in the upper-right. Strangely, years into using Flickr I had never noticed that link, however long it's been there. There's also a third link, marked "New", atop the advertising on the right. See all three links below:
With all that said, I'll still argue that Flickr is hiding its most important feature from its users. If you need three redundant links on the homepage to remind people about what you really want them to click, there's a problem in the design.
Here's how Twitter presents its main feature:
Notice that Twitter also has several menus, features, and other secondary elements - yet the main feature is called out visually. It's impossible to miss what Twitter wants you to do. And there's no reason for a redundant link.
This isn't fair, there is a HUGE link for this exact same purpose that has been left out of this screenshot.
What about the 'Upload' link after explore in the top-level menu items?
You've partially cropped it off here, but it's up there. Now, the fact that you've missed it, well, that might say still something about the experience. Hmm.
(I used to work at Flickr.)
You've cropped off the main upload link. It's next to the "Explore" link, in the main navigation, and visible at all times, on practically every page. (You can just see the "Up..." on the right edge of you screenshot.)
It's not perfect, and it's not the biggest, shiniest thing on the page, but it is there. You just seem to have missed it.
It's not a bad thing. If you have to work hard to upload a photo, maybe you will think twice before generating digital waste.
Here is the other half of the screenshot, where we have two "upload" links (one of them pretty big). One in the navigation and the other in the content area.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/easysleazycheesy/5552006429/
There's also a far more prominent upload link in the main menu, on the right hand side. You've unhelpfully (I hesitate to say deceivingly!) chopped this out of your screenshot, though you can still see the 'Up...' at the start of it.
That said, I have other problems with flickr's interface myself. The search never seems to work as I expect it to, and it seems a bit too hard to navigate to specific sets via the website (way easier on the mobile app or apple tv).
Yeah, the Upload link issue has been bugging me for ages, I am not even sure that I will renew my Flickr Pro account this year, if they do not do anything to fix their UI.
You have the "Upload" link on the right on top menu. :)
As a follow-up, there's a question to be asked: IS uploading a photo the most important feature? I'm pretty sure I use it more for finding and viewing photos than I do uploading photos. Uploading is obviously a fundamental requirement for the service, but not necessarily the most important in terms of regular use by most users.
@pjohnkeane - Uploading photos is central to Flickr because without them, there's no Flickr. Twitter without tweets, Google without search results. All other features - browsing, searching, tagging photos - are secondary. (One would imagine Flickr realizes this, since they've linked to uploading three times on one page... I'm just saying that it could be designed better.)
@Mark Hurst - I don't deny that uploading photos is central to Flickr. But I'm not sure that your travails are necessarily indicative - from my home page, flickr is telling me that 5,500-6,000 photos are uploaded each minute, so clearly people are managing quite effectively!
I don't doubt that you've been blind to those other two prominent upload links and that's made things awkward for you, and I don't doubt that the screen could be designed better - I know that I often find myself hunting around in those dropdown menus from the main navigation looking for other things, but the way you've called it out is kind of like taking a screenshot of twitter and complaining that there's only a tiny icon for posting a new tweet (with less prominence than search, profile, who to follow) over on the right hand side of the top navigation, whilst ignoring the more obvious bit, sort of like this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkeane/5553645106/
Aside: if you want to focus on the Upload link being in an unhelpful place, you could point out the one in the footer instead (they've actually got Upload on the screen FOUR times!). :)
The correction is definitely appreciated. As others have said, the flickr interface isn't perfect. I am, admittedly, biased as I love, love, love flickr. My initial response to you was more in the way of "hey, that's my community you're ragging on!" I think the conversation you're presenting is deeper.
I find the "new" marker and the advertisement under the largest upload link to be interesting. I don't have either of those items in my experience and I can only venture to guess that it is because I've paid for flickr. Regardless of the pay aspect, statistically speaking, the largest upload link is in the place it should be. It is in the place where a user's eye would make its first resting point as an eye descends the page; with that in mind I think that the link is in the optimum spot as a call to action.
I don't, however, think the link is styled well. Prior to this interface, I'm fairly certain the upload call to action was style more like a button and I think that, though it doesn't suit the 'style' of the page, nor the visual goals of flickr, a more button like call would be better.
Where the post is more misguided is to assume that flickrs most important button is that of an upload nature at this point in it's maturity. I'd assume that, more than not, flickr is about consuming more than publishing. Yes, publishing is necessary in order to have something to consume, but (a) you cannot expect people to be publishing all the time when it comes to photos and thus the vast (and sometimes convoluted) means of purposeful and serendipitous browsing is obviously more important to flickr and (b) they don't have a lack of publishing problem, they've been around since 2004, they have tons of content and usage. That being said, they wouldn't have drawn back the prominence of the upload functionality unless they saw reason to; assuming that they don't know what they are doing is naive. This service has been around for a long, long time. This service has made many, though gradual changes. This service has also had many of the smartest minds in design and development working for it for the better part of a decade. Assuming that they didn't make calculated decisions in placing items on the page is a bit insulting.
You could (as you did) compare this to something like twitter and say "what if the 'tweet' button was hidden away similarly" but flickr is as similar to twitter as it isn't. Debatably, on twitter, it's quite confusing to see a form field without a submit button until you click into the field. Conversely, you obviously have managed to get photos into your flickr for years of usage - so how did you do that? Is it like twitter, in that most barely ever upload via the web interface anyway; do most utilize a client of some sort? More over, the services are very similar because the central purpose to use these things is to "share". Sharing is some-what-equal parts publishing and conversation. Making publishing the most important bit could be detrimental to the community in the end. Making the microphone bigger than the conversation doesn't make for a good conversation.
@pjohnkeane - comparing Twitter and Flickr, my point is that Twitter makes it blindingly obvious where to act - the design practically has a neon sign around the text box. For all its efforts to point out the Upload link, the Flickr homepage has a relatively cluttered feel.
@matt - yes, there are differences between Twitter and Flickr - they are totally separate services with different usage patterns, in the particulars. My point is just in the general: a primary element shouldn't be squirrelled away - and triple redundancy indicates that, yes, the design could be better.
It's worth noting that an increasing percentage of uploads to Flickr (at least by some of the more active uploaders) is not through the web at all. It's from iPhoto and other programs that use the Flickr API so that uploading happens entirely transparently as part of a 'Share' command in those applications.
Still, for those who only occasionally upload a photo (and most likely do it through the web), one rule of usability would be that returning to a UI after being away from it for a period of time shouldn't require that you rescan the whole thing to see where your link is; it should definitely be front and centre.
I agree with Mark on this one. Even though there are multiple links for posting photos, none of them are obvious and every time I visit Flickr, I'm surprised at how much you have to think in order to post a photo.
A simple button or treatment on the link would make it much more obvious. Even Picasa and Kodak Gallery (shudder!) do a better job in that area - http://grab.by/9Jix, http://grab.by/9Jiu.
It almost makes me wonder if Yahoo is intentionally making it less obvious so that people won't upload photos and cost them the bandwidth!
I bet if the "Upload" on the far right of the Flickr nav were just turned into a blue button with white text (could just be CSS) it'd be easier to spot and more likely to be used.
there's two "new tweet" places on twitter. is double redundancy 66% of the crime of triple redundancy? or only 50%?
what's wrong with having more than one link to something. i know you don't advocate usability guidelines, Mark, but that smells a little bit like one.