Google Photos no longer offers unlimited storage for unsupported video formats

Photo by Vlad Savov / The Verge

Google Photos will no longer let you upload unsupported video formats and take advantage of the free unlimited storage it offers, the company announced in a change to its support site earlier this week, as first spotted by Android Police. It’s a small change that won’t affect most users. Google Photos already supports the following video formats:

.mpg, .mod, .mmv, .tod, .wmv, .asf, .avi, .divx, .mov, .m4v, .3gp, .3g2, .mp4, .m2t, .m2ts, .mts, and .mkv files,

This leaves some RAW and VOB files as the most popular formats Google Photos doesn’t support. So if you use excluded formats, get ready to watch your storage more closely or pay a bit extra for Google One.

I finally wised up and uploaded my photo library to Google Photos a few weeks ago, and so far, it’s been wonderful. I’m paying for storage so I can upload full-resolution photos; the free unlimited storage only allows for “optimized” images (see: compressed). While iCloud Photo Library — which I’ve been using for years — isn’t necessarily bad, the search capabilities within Google Photos far surpass anything Apple can muster at this point.

Google Photos is definitely worth using for most people, and losing the ability to upload a few fringe formats to your unlimited storage likely won’t change that.


Is Google also data mining uploads on paid accounts?

Depends on what you mean by data mining.

Their algorithms/machine learning are being trained by all the mass data being added into the system. They don’t really have any advertising use to the photo data so they aren’t really using it for advertising. While with search and maps the algorithms automatically add information to the users advertising profile.

For a long time google used the exact same system for their paid for accounts and school accounts and turned off advertising displays for those accounts thinking it was valid, but got sued for collecting the children’s data even though it wasnt being used. So they decided to overhaul their entire system. Now they have two separate back ends and they intentionally don’t have the algorithms involved in personal advertising metrics on the google cloud paid accounts. However features launch at different times now since they have to be manually ported from the main accounts to cloud or vice versa depending on if a particular feature was developed for general use or for business clients specifically.

The machine learning algorithms for google photos on a google cloud paid account are likely the exact same as typical google photos since the main set dont plug into advertising profiles but its going to be a separate machine learning data pool that you are feeding and taking advantage of.

So the answer is yes, sort of.

You missed that they are required to scan for kiddie stuff using a Microsoft developed tool. That’s a very specific law and doesn’t reach much further than that, and only targets pre-identified photos, not new ones. If you’re a terrorist for instance, they don’t scan for Photos of your plots and hostages. Their protocols are very good, if you’ve ever dealt with GSuite support, you’ll know that getting support for Gmail is a pain in comparison because of how locked down it is.

Not only are they mining your data, but they are tracking your activities in and out of the web against your will, and then collaborating with data aggregators who are very good at de-anonymizing that data and selling it to credit agencies, health insurers, employers, advertisers, and domestic and foreign political groups.

You must be Donald Trump with how many falsehoods you crammed into one sentence.

I don’t really have any photo searching issues with Apple’s Photos. Date, location, people, objects, scenery, animals… It seems like most everything I search for comes up just fine. And I don’t say that as someone who can’t compare side by side with Google Photos. I use both so all of my photos are in two places.

I’ve been a fairly happy iCloud Photo Library user for a number of years, but recently uploaded a bunch of images to Google Photos to see how the photo recognition everyone is always raving about compared.

I uploaded a bunch of photos that included cows and a bunch of no-cow photos (I take a lot of hiking photos, and there are frequently cows) and did the same searches in Google Photos and iCloud Photo Library.

I was underwhelmed by Google. Both searches identified approximately 2/3rds of the cow photos correctly, but still missed a lot. There were a significant number of cow photos that one picked up but the other did not, going in both directions, making the final number similar.

– Google Photos correctly identified more images containing cows overall, but also had quite a few false positives, identifying benches, fences, walls, and horses as cows on a number of occasions.
– iCloud missed more cow photos overall, but also had virtually no false positives. A single photo of a miniature horse was identified as "cow," but every other match actually contained cows.

My takeaways are that both products have a long way to go in terms of accurate image recognition, and that they are overall pretty similar today. I would not use accuracy of image detection as a criteria for choosing one over the other at this point.

"A single photo of a miniature horse was identified as "cow," but every other match actually contained cows."

Were you like, to Apple : "these cows are smaaaaaalllll, those cows are far awaaaaaaaaayyy"

Sadly, not enough people will appreciate this.

So Google continues their practice of withdrawing support for features and services, and Micah’s response is to pay them for the privilege, while continuing to sacrifice privacy and security?

Is this Stockholm syndrome or allegiance to paid advertisers?

Doing this is obvious for one reason. Basically people were using it to store movies and high Def videos. The formats it does support are sufficient enough for everybody. They are protecting themselves from legal threats from the movie industry and rightly so TBH

Guess the ol’ rename massive file as an unsupported format for unlimited storage is dead.

The case for having your own NAS is getting stronger.

I abandoned all cloud storage solutions 4 years ago and have 12TB of space I can access from anywhere and any device. Only use OneDrive for temporary storage.

The cost is the very obvious differentiating factor. Set me up a 12TB NAS for free and we’ll talk.

What are you talking about? That’s only about $300-$400 dollars worth of equipment. Easy. /s

You cant put a price on privacy and the NAS pays for itself over the years compared to a lifetime subscription.

A NAS with 12TB is less than an iPhone X. That puts things into perspective!

That’s how they get you man…. convenience. Convenient doesn’t always mean "better" and there is no such thing as "free". There’s always some kind of compromise.

If you value your privacy and freedom a NAS is definitely the way to go. Nowadays you can snag a decent one plus a couple TB for $300-400. That setup should last you a few solid years before any failures and should that happen it’s super easy to maintain. Literally swap out the bad drive and drop in the new drive and let it do its thing. NAS have become incredibly affordable and user friendly over the last few years.

What creeps me out about google photos is how virtually impossible it is to delete everything. They ended up with lots of photos that I don’t remember giving it then when I tried to delete them, it was next to impossible. And I’m not alone. Much has been posted about that.

"optimized" images (see: compressed).

I challenge you to tell the difference with a full screen photo on a 4K Monitor. Optimized is beyond what I need, specially after editing the originals on my phone

Just confirmed
Renaming files with supported file type extensions works just fine. Have fun!

I can’t stress this enough but microsoft one drive offers far better value than google photos. The photo searching may not be as good as google photos, but it’s still on par with what iCloud gives. It also gives you access to office 365 applications on desktop and mobile. Plus versioning of files. (life saver IMO) The 1tb plan still costs less than what google or even iCloud offers.

View All Comments
Back to top ↑