Sorry, we don't support your browser.  Install a modern browser

A Free Version#25

?

Because the monthly cost is steep (my coffee is cheap).

a year ago

Free to browse (and maybe comment, but I’m not convinced on that one) would be cool.

a year ago
4
E

Plenty of people enjoy looking at beautiful images but not posting. A free account would be perfect for this. Could allow comments, following, and favoriting perhaps?

a year ago
7
Merged Free user tier to view photos only#150
a year ago
4
?

Free users can post , but not original quality or some features limited …I think

a year ago
L
  • free App
  • membership as in app purchase
  • several membership levels:
    • free: only looking
    • commenter: cheap
    • full access: full price as of now
a year ago
?

Why on earth would we want free commenters? That’s the pathway to spam comments, harassment campsigns etc. by having a cost there is significant friction to some of the worst things that happen on social media.

It’s OK if not everyone signs up for this app. It’s not meant to be the next unicorn. The best thing about the app is other people’s photos. If anything it should be cheaper to post photos and more expensive to comment without posting.

a year ago
24

+1 for a free viewer account. I love looking at photography but I don’t want to pst anything. In my mind a free account should just be for viewing. It should have no way of adding any content (no uploads, no commenting, not part of the “community”)

9 months ago
4

Tiers sound nice. But! If you get to post comments you have to pay.

8 months ago
1
M

Please no! I will pay double the price a month to avoid another instagram filled with fake likes and spam. Let it be.

6 months ago
2
?

Free account for browsing, following and commenting, that would be amazing when it comes to exposure.

6 months ago
?

A few comments have said free accounts should be able to comment. I think that should be a paid feature. For me (as a non-photgrapher) I want to look at good photograhy, I can leave commenting to those who pay. Opening up commenting to free accounts just seems like a can of worms for spam and an unhealthy community.

6 months ago
?

Then maybe an option to choose if you want to receive comments only from other photographers, or from everyone.

6 months ago

Free account should only allow for viewing - not commenting. This would solve the issue of potential bots and spammers as they will most likely not pay for multiple accounts in order to just comment and spam.

4 months ago
3
J

I like the paid-only aspect: It reduces spam and poor quality uploads. However, $5/mo. is way too steap for the relatively small user base and daily uploads. $1-2/mo. would be a better price point. I would like to see Glass shift to an emphasis on peer-review, rather than public portfolios, since there are plenty of other sites for that, but few sites like this excellent signal:noise ratio.

3 months ago
J

Please keep this paid-only, even viewing. Once you shift into a public audience, it shifts from peer-review into gamification for “like counts” and “exposure”. There are plenty of other platforms for that trash. Keep Glass classy.

3 months ago
3

Free Accounts will drastically increase spam, non-photographs and manipulation of the platform. If you want a account is should be read and appreciated only.

a month ago

I’m also against making the app free. We’re paying to have a clean app without adds or spam, and that’s fine by me. I do agree that a lower fee would be reasonable though.

25 days ago