I've been reading this thread for an hour and cannot seem to find an answer or workaround to my dilemma.
I want to allow a friend/client and fellow SmugMug Pro user to display entire galleries of a subcategory on my SM Pro account, so that we don't have to go about the process of uploading ALL the photos to both galleries -- better for SM and timesaving for us.
However, while I can choose MANY PHOTOS in my own account, to move virtual copies of photos to another users account requires choosing one photo at a time--unless I'm missing something, which I hope I am. I don't want to spend hours and hours uploading the same photos to his account.
Does anyone know how I can simply display the entire subcategory and associated galleries in it on another users account? I have access to his account and want to make this seamless as possible.
Thanks!
I have run into this exact same issue and am working on a way to mass collect from one gallery to another via an external program that uses the API. The problem I'm running into is that each image would require a call to the API, and a massive number of calls back-to-back will probably make the API timeout to the application.
I have run into this exact same issue and am working on a way to mass collect from one gallery to another via an external program that uses the API. The problem I'm running into is that each image would require a call to the API, and a massive number of calls back-to-back will probably make the API timeout to the application.
Why would you think that the API would "timeout" just because you were making a lot of API calls? Maybe if you blasted 1000 calls at it without waiting for any responses, it might object, but if you do it in a managed way, keeping only 3-5 API calls in process at any time, I have no idea why that couldn't work just fine. Do you have evidence to the contrary or are you just worried about something?
Why would you think that the API would "timeout" just because you were making a lot of API calls? Maybe if you blasted 1000 calls at it without waiting for any responses, it might object, but if you do it in a managed way, keeping only 3-5 API calls in process at any time, I have no idea why that couldn't work just fine. Do you have evidence to the contrary or are you just worried about something?
The design of the feature I was thinking would iterate through an array with the same number of images in the gallery, so it probably would blast the API with a 1000 calls if a gallery had 1000 images. How would you suggest breaking it down to 3-5 calls in a process? I'm not a programmer so it's a technique that I'm not familiar with.
And why are you insinuating that I'm posting something out of my ass? I have evidence to prove my point, but having to post evidence every time I post anything is getting utterly ridiculous. You and Andy really need to chill out on this.
The design of the feature I was thinking would iterate through an array with the same number of images in the gallery, so it probably would blast the API with a 1000 calls if a gallery had 1000 images. How would you suggest breaking it down to 3-5 calls in a process? I'm not a programmer so it's a technique that I'm not familiar with.
And why are you insinuating that I'm posting something out of my ass? I have evidence to prove my point, but having to post evidence every time I post anything is getting utterly ridiculous. You and Andy really need to chill out on this.
Geez Samir, you can be really difficult to offer help to when you insult someone inquiring about your issue and attempting to help. I asked if you had evidence that holding only 3-5 calls open at any time was a problem?
It would take some programming to implement that, but it would be a much safer way to do it. There are lots of different ways to implement it, but basically, you'd fire off 5 requests and wait for them to return. Each time one returns, you'd fire off the next one, keeping no more than 5 at a time in progress.
What'd I do here? I do agree with John, Samir - he is just trying to help. He doesn't have an offending bone in his body, he's been helping hundreds (probably thousands!) here on Dgrin for a long time.
Geez Samir, you can be really difficult to offer help to when you insult someone inquiring about your issue and attempting to help. I asked if you had evidence that holding only 3-5 calls open at any time was a problem?
It would take some programming to implement that, but it would be a much safer way to do it. There are lots of different ways to implement it, but basically, you'd fire off 5 requests and wait for them to return. Each time one returns, you'd fire off the next one, keeping no more than 5 at a time in progress.
But I felt like you insulted me by questioning me like I didn't know what I was talking about.
On your idea of using the 3-5 at a time, if each collect had to return 'ok' before moving to the next image, do you think that would be enough of a delay? I was going to develop using phpsmug and php since I've done that before and just use the php function 'foreach' on the images array from images.get.
What'd I do here? I do agree with John, Samir - he is just trying to help. He doesn't have an offending bone in his body, he's been helping hundreds (probably thousands!) here on Dgrin for a long time.
You didn't do anything Andy. But we've talked about it before, and that was my feelings on the subject so I posted it.
I deal with criticisms on the littlest things all the time, and sometimes I get really fed up with it. I've actually had someome criticize my breathing once.
So after all the discussion if I understand everything pro and con and API and LR. There is no way to define a Smart Gallery (or bunches of them) via the API. So I can either do each one manually or use LR and upload multiple times.
I have run into this exact same issue and am working on a way to mass collect from one gallery to another via an external program that uses the API. The problem I'm running into is that each image would require a call to the API, and a massive number of calls back-to-back will probably make the API timeout to the application.
Wow! We've stirred up a can of old Tri-X or something here.
"Why can't we all be friends?
Anyway, this should be something simple to do, no? I mean we can do this by "replicating" galleries in one account, seems the function would be able to work when reviewing others, especially when permissions are set accordingly? Have you tried that API?
Now, keep in mind, I've never, nor have wish to, delve into the SM API. But with the brains here, I can wallow my way through something!
So after all the discussion if I understand everything pro and con and API and LR. There is no way to define a Smart Gallery (or bunches of them) via the API. So I can either do each one manually or use LR and upload multiple times.
Is that about right?
I'm thinkin' you're right. 'Cept for me, it's Aperture. And the Aperture uploader seems to time out on me 80% of the time on galleries with more than 100 images.
Anyway, this should be something simple to do, no? I mean we can do this by "replicating" galleries in one account, seems the function would be able to work when reviewing others, especially when permissions are set accordingly? Have you tried that API?
Now, keep in mind, I've never, nor have wish to, delve into the SM API. But with the brains here, I can wallow my way through something!
In theory it's pretty simple. You have something that asks for two gallery urls, source and destination. The source gallery is fed into the api and gets a list of all the images in that gallery. Then a function goes through each image in that album and adds it to the destination gallery. This was where the problem might be in that if it happens too fast, the API might reject the requests. But if there's a way to make it acknowledge each 'collection' before moving onto the next, it may be enough time in between requests. After it collects all the images from the source to the destination, you can work with the destination gallery.
I plan to code this in php using the phpsmug wrapper and php is a language I'm somewhat familiar with. The interface will probably be really raw, with just variable on the command line. For example, it might look something like this:
When this would be run in a browser, the results would just display in the browser. Quick, dirty, does the job.
But I'm not a programmer and I don't have time to do it. I've thought about paying someone $50 to make this, but I can't even use it right now if it was done, so I'm going to save my money. Now, if someone needs it right now and is willing to donate a bit to the cause (I have no job), I'll code it.
In theory it's pretty simple. You have something that asks for two gallery urls, source and destination. The source gallery is fed into the api and gets a list of all the images in that gallery. Then a function goes through each image in that album and adds it to the destination gallery. This was where the problem might be in that if it happens too fast, the API might reject the requests. But if there's a way to make it acknowledge each 'collection' before moving onto the next, it may be enough time in between requests. After it collects all the images from the source to the destination, you can work with the destination gallery.
I plan to code this in php using the phpsmug wrapper and php is a language I'm somewhat familiar with. The interface will probably be really raw, with just variable on the command line. For example, it might look something like this:
When this would be run in a browser, the results would just display in the browser. Quick, dirty, does the job.
But I'm not a programmer and I don't have time to do it. I've thought about paying someone $50 to make this, but I can't even use it right now if it was done, so I'm going to save my money. Now, if someone needs it right now and is willing to donate a bit to the cause (I have no job), I'll code it.
Samir, I don't really know what you're trying to do, but here's an idea. Would it be easier to just add a keyword to every image in the source gallery and then have the virtual gallery just draw via that keyword? It takes seconds to add a single keyword to all images in a given gallery in the UI because you can do it in one bulk operation.
Hi John, that would be a solution if the both the source and destination galleries reside on the same SM account. But in both my usage scenario and worldrider's, we're both collecting from another SM user's account. And unless they keyword the gallery, I'm afraid there wouldn't be a way to use your idea. :cry Good thinking though!
Smart gallery & popular - just for me
I hope I'm posting this in the right place. Just getting myself set-up and I think I'm doing fairly well, but I'm stuck on one thing. I have created a private gallery for a family event. I'd like people (obviously with the password) who visit to be able to click the thumbs up/down, and then have those smartly collected in another private gallery that only I can visit and see what the 'popular' photos were at months' end. And a step further - I'd really like to be able to click on a photo and see how many times it was voted popular. This is all just for my own use - I'd like to know what people think, when they don't specifically leave a comment. Can it be done?
Hi there, I've searched through this thread and I don't seem to see an answer for this yet:
My website is setup as a SmugIsland. I have one single, unlisted gallery where I upload all images. I'm creating keyword based smart galleries using the photos from this unlisted gallery.
When my visitors hit the site, they can only access the photos by clicking on the smart gallery name on the homepage (the search bar and the keywords don't return any results).
Is there a way to enable the keywords and search bar, on smart galleries built from unlisted images? So that if someone types in a keyword, the smart gallery and it's contents appear on the results page?
I love the Smart Gallery feature but... here's what I'd like to do and I am not sure if I can make this work.
I'd like to post photos in one gallery with the right click turned on (ie can save photo)
I'd like to display in a second gallery where the gallery setting does not allow sharing - and so not be able to share the photo if viewed from Gallery 2.
I tried this both ways - and either way, it seemed like whatever setting are set for where the original is, those are the settings for the virtual copy no matter what your gallery settings are.
So - that means I have to upload twice if I don't want to have sharing in one gallery - right?
I love the Smart Gallery feature but... here's what I'd like to do and I am not sure if I can make this work.
I'd like to post photos in one gallery with the right click turned on (ie can save photo)
I'd like to display in a second gallery where the gallery setting does not allow sharing - and so not be able to share the photo if viewed from Gallery 2.
I tried this both ways - and either way, it seemed like whatever setting are set for where the original is, those are the settings for the virtual copy no matter what your gallery settings are.
So - that means I have to upload twice if I don't want to have sharing in one gallery - right?
Thanks
Virtual copies have the settings of their original. There is no other way to do it with virtual copies on Smugmug. If you want different settings in the 2nd gallery, you will have to upload new copies for the 2nd gallery.
I've been reading this thread for an hour and cannot seem to find an answer or workaround to my dilemma.
I want to allow a friend/client and fellow SmugMug Pro user to display entire galleries of a subcategory on my SM Pro account, so that we don't have to go about the process of uploading ALL the photos to both galleries -- better for SM and timesaving for us.
However, while I can choose MANY PHOTOS in my own account, to move virtual copies of photos to another users account requires choosing one photo at a time--unless I'm missing something, which I hope I am. I don't want to spend hours and hours uploading the same photos to his account.
Does anyone know how I can simply display the entire subcategory and associated galleries in it on another users account? I have access to his account and want to make this seamless as possible.
Thanks!
Is this possible to do or are there any plans to implement it? I was really hoping so till I tried to do it and realized I could pick all the pics from my gallery but not from someone else's. Would be better if could just collect the whole gallery in 1 shot. Might have a requirement that both be 'friends' or something?
Is this possible to do or are there any plans to implement it? I was really hoping so till I tried to do it and realized I could pick all the pics from my gallery but not from someone else's. Would be better if could just collect the whole gallery in 1 shot. Might have a requirement that both be 'friends' or something?
Yes, it's exactly as you say. As long as you are friends with someone you can create a smart gallery of their photos. Create a new gallery and choose to make it smart. Instead of choosing "my photos" from the drop down, choose your friends, enter the rest of the info and wallah!
Comments
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=182809
The design of the feature I was thinking would iterate through an array with the same number of images in the gallery, so it probably would blast the API with a 1000 calls if a gallery had 1000 images. How would you suggest breaking it down to 3-5 calls in a process? I'm not a programmer so it's a technique that I'm not familiar with.
And why are you insinuating that I'm posting something out of my ass? I have evidence to prove my point, but having to post evidence every time I post anything is getting utterly ridiculous. You and Andy really need to chill out on this.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
It would take some programming to implement that, but it would be a much safer way to do it. There are lots of different ways to implement it, but basically, you'd fire off 5 requests and wait for them to return. Each time one returns, you'd fire off the next one, keeping no more than 5 at a time in progress.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
On your idea of using the 3-5 at a time, if each collect had to return 'ok' before moving to the next image, do you think that would be enough of a delay? I was going to develop using phpsmug and php since I've done that before and just use the php function 'foreach' on the images array from images.get.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
I deal with criticisms on the littlest things all the time, and sometimes I get really fed up with it. I've actually had someome criticize my breathing once.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Is that about right?
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Wow! We've stirred up a can of old Tri-X or something here.
"Why can't we all be friends?
Anyway, this should be something simple to do, no? I mean we can do this by "replicating" galleries in one account, seems the function would be able to work when reviewing others, especially when permissions are set accordingly? Have you tried that API?
Now, keep in mind, I've never, nor have wish to, delve into the SM API. But with the brains here, I can wallow my way through something!
I'm thinkin' you're right. 'Cept for me, it's Aperture. And the Aperture uploader seems to time out on me 80% of the time on galleries with more than 100 images.
I plan to code this in php using the phpsmug wrapper and php is a language I'm somewhat familiar with. The interface will probably be really raw, with just variable on the command line. For example, it might look something like this: When this would be run in a browser, the results would just display in the browser. Quick, dirty, does the job.
But I'm not a programmer and I don't have time to do it. I've thought about paying someone $50 to make this, but I can't even use it right now if it was done, so I'm going to save my money. Now, if someone needs it right now and is willing to donate a bit to the cause (I have no job), I'll code it.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
I hope I'm posting this in the right place. Just getting myself set-up and I think I'm doing fairly well, but I'm stuck on one thing. I have created a private gallery for a family event. I'd like people (obviously with the password) who visit to be able to click the thumbs up/down, and then have those smartly collected in another private gallery that only I can visit and see what the 'popular' photos were at months' end. And a step further - I'd really like to be able to click on a photo and see how many times it was voted popular. This is all just for my own use - I'd like to know what people think, when they don't specifically leave a comment. Can it be done?
davo
www.pixelpuddle.com
My website is setup as a SmugIsland. I have one single, unlisted gallery where I upload all images. I'm creating keyword based smart galleries using the photos from this unlisted gallery.
When my visitors hit the site, they can only access the photos by clicking on the smart gallery name on the homepage (the search bar and the keywords don't return any results).
Is there a way to enable the keywords and search bar, on smart galleries built from unlisted images? So that if someone types in a keyword, the smart gallery and it's contents appear on the results page?
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
I'd like to post photos in one gallery with the right click turned on (ie can save photo)
I'd like to display in a second gallery where the gallery setting does not allow sharing - and so not be able to share the photo if viewed from Gallery 2.
I tried this both ways - and either way, it seemed like whatever setting are set for where the original is, those are the settings for the virtual copy no matter what your gallery settings are.
So - that means I have to upload twice if I don't want to have sharing in one gallery - right?
Thanks
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Is this possible to do or are there any plans to implement it? I was really hoping so till I tried to do it and realized I could pick all the pics from my gallery but not from someone else's. Would be better if could just collect the whole gallery in 1 shot. Might have a requirement that both be 'friends' or something?
Yes, it's exactly as you say. As long as you are friends with someone you can create a smart gallery of their photos. Create a new gallery and choose to make it smart. Instead of choosing "my photos" from the drop down, choose your friends, enter the rest of the info and wallah!
-Leftquark
Former SmugMug Product Team
aaron AT aaronmphotography DOT com
Website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com
My SmugMug CSS Customizations website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com/Customizations