Unscheduled downtime, new feature Tuesday night 1/26

LiquidElephant

I'll check this out later but - can we use EXIF data for creating Smart Galleries?
e.g. all photos taken with a particular lense.

Andy

LiquidElephant wrote:

I'll check this out later but - can we use EXIF data for creating Smart Galleries?
e.g. all photos taken with a particular lense.

No, I'm sorry it's not one of the smart rules. Possibly one day in the future.

Press-Republican

Sorting
Smart galleries = good.
Sorting of all my galleries = bad.

Did something unforeseen happen with the sort orders once the change was made? Some of my galleries have changed to random sorting while others are the opposite of the original sort order.

www.pressrepublicanphotos.com

Aaron

LiquidElephant

Andy wrote:

No, I'm sorry it's not one of the smart rules. Possibly one day in the future.

No problem, luckily my gallery is small enough that I can add some keywords instead

rainforest1155

Press-Republican wrote:

Smart galleries = good.
Sorting of all my galleries = bad.

Did something unforeseen happen with the sort orders once the change was made? Some of my galleries have changed to random sorting while others are the opposite of the original sort order.

www.pressrepublicanphotos.com

Aaron

Hi Aaron,

We are aware there is a problem with the arrange/sort feature and have our engineers looking at it right now. Please stand by while we work on getting this issue resolved. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Sebastian

pjspics

Press-Republican wrote:

Smart galleries = good.
Sorting of all my galleries = bad.

Did something unforeseen happen with the sort orders once the change was made? Some of my galleries have changed to random sorting while others are the opposite of the original sort order.

www.pressrepublicanphotos.com

Aaron

Same problem here:

http://www.paul-griffiths.net/Motorsport/Karts/Round-1-Jan-10/11040789_cp5fx#772445479_TCyXD

All my photos are now random and not sorted by Caption - has someone picked this up at SM and is there a fix?

Andy

pjspics wrote:

Same problem here:

http://www.paul-griffiths.net/Motorsport/Karts/Round-1-Jan-10/11040789_cp5fx#772445479_TCyXD

All my photos are now random and not sorted by Caption - has someone picked this up at SM and is there a fix?

please write our Support Heroes and we'll help you from the Desk.

Malte

{JT} wrote:

For now, for this use case, yes.

It would be cool if we could toggle a switch to have the Smart Gallery's settings override those of the virtual photos inside. Is that technically feasible, JT?

Am I getting this right? Collecting vitual copies into galleries and having a gallery import virtual copies by rules, are two ways of doing the same thing? There is no "Virtual Gallery", instead all galleries are smart and can contain virtual copies?

Looking very cool!

Malte

Andy

Malte wrote:

It would be cool if we could toggle a switch to have the Smart Gallery's settings override those of the virtual photos inside. Is that technically feasible, JT?

Possible, but not likely - we need to be very careful about bloating features like this with more and more options, as it adds a lot to the support load. Not everyone is Malte

Am I getting this right? Collecting vitual copies into galleries and having a gallery import virtual copies by rules, are two ways of doing the same thing? There is no "Virtual Gallery", instead all galleries are smart and can contain virtual copies?

Ding! It's exactly how we want to to be seen - all galleries are now smart.

Malte

It seems a gallery can only contain 1000 virtual copies, doesn't matter if you import by rule or collect in bulk. However the collecting method acts as if you're creating more than 1000 virtual copies, but nothing happens.

Why the cap?

Malte

Edit: It creates the 1000 virtual copies, but acts as if it created whatever number you requested.

Andy

Malte wrote:

It seems a gallery can only contain 1000 virtual copies, doesn't matter if you import by rule or collect in bulk. However the collecting method acts as if you're creating more than 1000 virtual copies, but nothing happens.

Why the cap?

Malte

Edit: It creates the 1000 virtual copies, but acts as if it created whatever number you requested.

the cap is for performance reasons right now, while we see how this feature reacts in the wild. We may choose to increase it, can't say either way right now.

Malte

Andy wrote:

Not everyone is Malte

Yes yes I know, the question is why aren't they?!

Andy wrote:

Ding! It's exactly how we want to to be seen - all galleries are now smart.

Tell the marketing guys I'll have a referral point everytime it's used... wink

Malte

JerryBarton

OK - you (y'all) got it running again with the new features. In a previous life, I would now be asking my staff (once they slept and had a good meal) to recommend better procedures to avoid all nighters for the staff and six hours of downtime for international customers. Hope someone is looking at this.

I have no idea whether I'll use the new features, but I do want my site to be reliable.

www.SGphoto.us

cool, so whats the new feature?

RogersDA

www.SGphoto.us wrote:

cool, so whats the new feature?

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=157266

BTW: Your site link in your signature is borked. It is linked to http://www.dgrin.com/www.SGphoto.us

jchin

Nice feature!

However, I would have preferred the default for Collections by others to be disabled. Until I know how this feature works and decide if it is something I want others to be able to use on my photos.

Anyway ... it was easy enough to go manually disable it. However, for those who do not check for updates often, they may not know the option is there.

Thanks for the hard work guys!!!
The Smug Wizards are the **BEST**

Andy

www.SGphoto.us wrote:

cool, so whats the new feature?

http://blogs.smugmug.com/release-notes

You'll want to subscribe to our Release Notes blog, so that you don't miss a single update from SmugMug http://blogs.smugmug.com/release-notes/ at the bottom, there's a link for Entries (RSS) - put that in your favorite feed reader.

TalkieT

Speakoff wrote:

You guys rock. Every one of you. Ignore the complainers. The downtime is worth whatever brilliant features you're about to release.

I'm sorry to call you on this, but that's YOUR opinion and you are entitled to it. Please don't devalue the opinion of the SM users that value continuity of performance over a feature they may not use.

To those users, the downtime won't be worth it.

regards
Neil Gardner
www.nzsnaps.com

BradfordBenn

I have a hunch that some of the team is sleeping and working on the new stuff, some of these ideas posited here might get missed, so don't forget about http://smugmug.uservoice.com/

photogmomma

Can I assume that this is why my client can't place an order? She's been trying to do it all day... Just checking so I can let her know when it's fixed. (I'm watching the blog...)

Thanks.

Andy

photogmomma wrote:

Can I assume that this is why my client can't place an order? She's been trying to do it all day... Just checking so I can let her know when it's fixed. (I'm watching the blog...)

Thanks.

Nope. We've been fully online since early morning East Coast time.

please have your customer write our Support Heroes and let us help them directly from the help desk. Thanks!

Red71Shark

I agree completely. I do not belong to any other website that consciously shuts itself down as often as this one. If the hardware is in need of constant maintenance then we need better hardware. If all we are doing is dropping the site to add doo-dads then we should do it quarterly instead of weekly. Either that or we need to separate the e-commerce sites from the non-e-commerce sites.

TalkieT wrote:

I'm sorry to call you on this, but that's YOUR opinion and you are entitled to it. Please don't devalue the opinion of the SM users that value continuity of performance over a feature they may not use.

To those users, the downtime won't be worth it.

regards
Neil Gardner
www.nzsnaps.com