Custom Watermarking not Working?

AlarconAlarcon Registered Users Posts: 24 Big grins
edited May 4, 2011 in SmugMug Support
I've got a few galleries that I uploaded last night and this morning whose custom watermarks still aren't appearing. They still have the default big "PROOF" across the images.

I've tried turning the watermarks off and on again, which doesn't work. Any ideas?

Comments

  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited May 3, 2011
    Hi, go to your tools menu, many photos, watermarking - then select the photos, select your watermark, then click the watermark button
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • AlarconAlarcon Registered Users Posts: 24 Big grins
    edited May 3, 2011
    Andy wrote: »
    Hi, go to your tools menu, many photos, watermarking - then select the photos, select your watermark, then click the watermark button


    Hmmm... Seems like kind of a pain for lots of galleries (I have about 30 more to upload today). I've been using a quick setting preset for all the galleries - does the watermarking not work when doing that?
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited May 3, 2011
    Alarcon wrote: »
    Hmmm... Seems like kind of a pain for lots of galleries (I have about 30 more to upload today). I've been using a quick setting preset for all the galleries - does the watermarking not work when doing that?
    If the watermark is configured before you upload, it will automatically be applied to images as you upload. You only have to manually apply the watermark if you change the setting after you upload the photos and want the new setting to apply to existing photos.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • AlarconAlarcon Registered Users Posts: 24 Big grins
    edited May 3, 2011
    jfriend wrote: »
    If the watermark is configured before you upload, it will automatically be applied to images as you upload. You only have to manually apply the watermark if you change the setting after you upload the photos and want the new setting to apply to existing photos.

    That's what I'm doing, but it's not working. I'm trying to use the watermark I've used for the past year or so, it's definitely configured correctly. I'm using the smugmug Lightroom plug-in to upload the photos and am choosing the preset during that upload. The watermark isn't applied then. Then, if I go into the gallery and choose the quick setting again, it still doesn't work.

    I've tried recreating the quick preset, just to make sure I hadn't made a mistake in creating the preset but it didn't work the 2nd time either.

    Manually adding the watermark does work though, it's just a pain.
  • SamirDSamirD Registered Users Posts: 3,474 Major grins
    edited May 3, 2011
    Try uploading to the gallery using the SM simple uploader and the preset. You only have to let it upload a few and then check to see if it's watermarked correctly or not.

    If it works correctly, it's something related to the lightroom plugin. If it doesn't, it's related to the preset.
    Pictures and Videos of the Huntsville Car Scene: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
    Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Watermarking is still broke...
    I am getting it as well. SM puts it on one, or doesn't put on another. When I upload - I get 10 photos with my watermark and 3 more (uploaded at the same time) that never get touched.

    I (waited 24 hours) then went back and RE-APPLIED the quick settings... which should not have to be done ANYWAY and it's still doing it.

    *YES* Support ticket created, and "NO" no response as of yet....
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    I am getting it as well. SM puts it on one, or doesn't put on another. When I upload - I get 10 photos with my watermark and 3 more (uploaded at the same time) that never get touched.

    I (waited 24 hours) then went back and RE-APPLIED the quick settings... which should not have to be done ANYWAY and it's still doing it.

    *YES* Support ticket created, and "NO" no response as of yet....
    One thing to check. Smugmug will not watermark any image that is less than 800px on the long side so make sure you are uploading large enough images.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    jfriend wrote: »
    One thing to check. Smugmug will not watermark any image that is less than 800px on the long side so make sure you are uploading large enough images.

    Good to know but ALL images are 18mp.. 800px isn't the issue :)
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    Good to know but ALL images are 18mp.. 800px isn't the issue :)
    Can you post a link to the gallery where it watermarked some of the newly uploaded images, but not others?
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Oddly after I sent the email to the help team they must have done something. Now, the issue is (while awaiting a response) I created a "NEW" watermark and I added it and applied it. It's going on the "NEW" photos that are uploading currently but it's NOT replacing the old watermark. Any idea's on that?headscratch.gif
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    Oddly after I sent the email to the help team they must have done something. Now, the issue is (while awaiting a response) I created a "NEW" watermark and I added it and applied it. It's going on the "NEW" photos that are uploading currently but it's NOT replacing the old watermark. Any idea's on that?headscratch.gif
    Setting a new watermark on the gallery does not change the watermark on existing photos, it only affects newly uploaded photos. To apply the watemark to existing images, you have to go to Tools/Many Photos/More/Watermarking, select the images you want to affect, the watermark you want to apply and apply it.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    jfriend wrote: »
    Setting a new watermark on the gallery does not change the watermark on existing photos, it only affects newly uploaded photos. To apply the watemark to existing images, you have to go to Tools/Many Photos/More/Watermarking, select the images you want to affect, the watermark you want to apply and apply it.

    So let me get this straight. There is no way to REAPPLY a watermark to every gallery at once. I have to go into EACH gallery one by one and go to tools, and do this? That is cumbersome, and I find it hard to believe an option not avail to do everything at once time. ne_nau.gif
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    So let me get this straight. There is no way to REAPPLY a watermark to every gallery at once. I have to go into EACH gallery one by one and go to tools, and do this? That is cumbersome, and I find it hard to believe an option not avail to do everything at once time. ne_nau.gif
    Correct. This is a common complaint, but as far as I know, there is no other way.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    jfriend wrote: »
    Correct. This is a common complaint, but as far as I know, there is no other way.

    Retarded!

    They need to flush the DEV.... It's bad enough no FTP, nor mass logo (as Fotki.com does..) Actually they do both.
    :flush

    Thank you for responding... It's too bad they don't listen to the people, hell the FTP thing has been an on going thing since 08 probably longer in posts I have seen.
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    Retarded!

    They need to flush the DEV.... It's bad enough no FTP, nor mass logo (as Fotki.com does..) Actually they do both.
    :flush

    Thank you for responding... It's too bad they don't listen to the people, hell the FTP thing has been an on going thing since 08 probably longer in posts I have seen.

    http://news.smugmug.com has nearly 10 years of release notes - nearly everything that we put out on the site is a result of direct customer feedback and input. Just this past two weeks, we implemented changes to our uploaders that jfriend suggested 3 weeks ago. To make them stronger, better, faster, more friendly and more performant. We love customer input, it's like gold to us - and we try to be responsive to everything. We can't guarantee we'll do every single request, but we definitely listen, and our public record in our release notes shows this.

    I'm sorry we haven't done FTP, not sure if or when we will. I can tell you we are working on some very exciting, highly-demanded features though.

    Thanks for your passionate input!
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Andy wrote: »
    http://news.smugmug.com has nearly 10 years of release notes - nearly everything that we put out on the site is a result of direct customer feedback and input. Just this past two weeks, we implemented changes to our uploaders that jfriend suggested 3 weeks ago. To make them stronger, better, faster, more friendly and more performant. We love customer input, it's like gold to us - and we try to be responsive to everything. We can't guarantee we'll do every single request, but we definitely listen, and our public record in our release notes shows this.

    I'm sorry we haven't done FTP, not sure if or when we will. I can tell you we are working on some very exciting, highly-demanded features though.

    Thanks for your passionate input!

    Andy, I have been on many of sites. Your site had a few things I wanted though the cost is high for what I sell vs. price of service. That is one thing I think that should be looked at. For someone that does "x amount" of sales - maybe offer a reduced account, then as it gets very profitable then a "set cost per month/year"

    Second: The FTP really should be looked at. In theory your dev's could introduce this and I have not read a reason why it really has not been introduced. There are LOTS of requests not just on here but also on other boards about FTP on "this" site...

    Third: The applying watermark option. This should be a no brainer. "Majority" of people that believe in watermarks offer this on every photo. This just makes sense. Esp for more established individuals who say "may" lose a partner (that was listed on their logo) or (change company name) or (change their logo), or watermark info. Going into each gallery is just way to time consuming. This should be looked at heavily...

    I am passionate because I know this site could be a bit simpler and could work a lot better with just some tiny changes....
  • SamirDSamirD Registered Users Posts: 3,474 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    Retarded!

    They need to flush the DEV.... It's bad enough no FTP, nor mass logo (as Fotki.com does..) Actually they do both.
    :flush

    Thank you for responding... It's too bad they don't listen to the people, hell the FTP thing has been an on going thing since 08 probably longer in posts I have seen.
    I didn't know Fotki did FTP. Good to know.

    And for the record, I think I've been asking for FTP since 2006. I know it was right before SM added video.
    Pictures and Videos of the Huntsville Car Scene: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
    Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
  • SamirDSamirD Registered Users Posts: 3,474 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    Second: The FTP really should be looked at. In theory your dev's could introduce this and I have not read a reason why it really has not been introduced. There are LOTS of requests not just on here but also on other boards about FTP on "this" site...
    I'd love to see where else FTP has been discussed if you have links. Oh, and be sure to vote for the feature request, now #7 on the top 10 things we want, and still climbing:
    http://feedback.smugmug.com/forums/17723-smugmug/suggestions/294159-ftp-uploading

    It's nice to know that I'm not the only one that things FTP is a real solution. The technical implementation is also trivial since SM uses Amazon. I too haven't seen a good reason. Exposure Manager has a wonderful FTP implementation.
    Pictures and Videos of the Huntsville Car Scene: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
    Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    SamirD wrote: »
    I'd love to see where else FTP has been discussed if you have links. Oh, and be sure to vote for the feature request, now #7 on the top 10 things we want, and still climbing:
    http://feedback.smugmug.com/forums/17723-smugmug/suggestions/294159-ftp-uploading

    It's nice to know that I'm not the only one that things FTP is a real solution. The technical implementation is also trivial since SM uses Amazon. I too haven't seen a good reason. Exposure Manager has a wonderful FTP implementation.

    If you google. search ie, FTP needed smugmug, etc etc... there are all kinds of requests out there. Fotki has done it since I have been on there like 2004. It works great, it FLIES, etc... If they offered coupons and more items for sale then it would be the perfect service. They also have great watermarking capabilities (soon as you add it up) it pre-fills all photos at once. Sure it takes time to populate but you don't have to go to each damn gallery one by one..................thumb.gif

    And at 40.00 a year.. you can't beat it :)

    I do like this place, but several things (ie. cost, being effective, working out things for customers to make things work better) is important
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    If you google. search ie, FTP needed smugmug, etc etc... there are all kinds of requests out there. Fotki has done it since I have been on there like 2004. It works great, it FLIES, etc... If they offered coupons and more items for sale then it would be the perfect service. They also have great watermarking capabilities (soon as you add it up) it pre-fills all photos at once. Sure it takes time to populate but you don't have to go to each damn gallery one by one..................thumb.gif

    And at 40.00 a year.. you can't beat it :)

    I do like this place, but several things (ie. cost, being effective, working out things for customers to make things work better) is important

    See my comment here:
    http://feedback.smugmug.com/forums/17723-smugmug/suggestions/294159-ftp-uploading?ref=title

    thanks!
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Andy wrote: »
    See my comment here:
    http://feedback.smugmug.com/forums/17723-smugmug/suggestions/294159-ftp-uploading?ref=title

    thanks!

    I read it, but not sure exactly what that means. Whether you implement it "head on, when you started" or in the middle should not make a difference. It's going to be the same amount of work and effort. There enough people on here to justify cost, effort, and desire to get it done... Our hands are tied, it's the CEO, CIO, DEVS, and others whom have to get it done.

    More definitive answers would be nice as well - something a bit less vague.deal.gif

    Why can't you just have someone spend a day creating directories filled with "random photos" you have if that is the case. Just have them - do it all day... Doesn't seem like the "devs" are doing anything noticeable.. how about assigning them to do that? :)
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    Damon016 wrote: »
    I read it, but not sure exactly what that means. Whether you implement it "head on, when you started" or in the middle should not make a difference. It's going to be the same amount of work and effort. There enough people on here to justify cost, effort, and desire to get it done... Our hands are tied, it's the CEO, CIO, DEVS, and others whom have to get it done.

    More definitive answers would be nice as well - something a bit less vague.deal.gif

    Why can't you just have someone spend a day creating directories filled with "random photos" you have if that is the case. Just have them - do it all day... Doesn't seem like the "devs" are doing anything noticeable.. how about assigning them to do that? :)

    All of our sorcerers are tasked on high-priority projects right now. I said in my comment on the FTP post that we can look at that once we have more gallery levels implemented (a project that is marked as 'started' on our feedback site.
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • Damon016Damon016 Registered Users Posts: 124 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    I see... well hopefully that means working on the issue with the slowness as well... thumb.gif

    Started doesn't really put a time frame into place unfortunately... rolleyes1.gif

    Thank's for responding however... (crossing fingers for sooner rather than later)
  • SamirDSamirD Registered Users Posts: 3,474 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2011
    I've been spearheading the campaign for FTP for a long time now, and I appreciate Andy's response. It makes sense too, if they want FTP to be able to do unlimited gallery levels, they have to build that first.

    In the meantime, I'm continuing to work with the developer of smugftp.com, and thanks to some google searches, I came across another uploader that may fill the gap in the meantime, fireuploader.com.
    Pictures and Videos of the Huntsville Car Scene: www.huntsvillecarscene.com
    Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Sign In or Register to comment.