David - do you know how to get an older version from the site? I have 2.0.2.1 and am having the same issues as you. I thought that I would try out the one you said was ok for you - 2.0.1.20 (while David Devbobo is away), but it seems that the site only has the latest version?
David - do you know how to get an older version from the site? I have 2.0.2.1 and am having the same issues as you. I thought that I would try out the one you said was ok for you - 2.0.1.20 (while David Devbobo is away), but it seems that the site only has the latest version?
That sounds like a very reasonable thing to do. I tried it as well. Unfortunately, the older version behaved exactly the same as the newer version. I think that either I did something wrong (like accidentally canceling the sync) or the server software changed. Certainly the server end of things has been changing over the last week, as the software team tries to fix bugs, add features, and respond to user issues.
David Devbobo are you back from Fiji? Hope you had a great time?
Other than hoping to get the 2.0.1.20 link, is there any chance that DigiMarc could be incorporated into your plugin? I have no idea what the stats are of SM clients that use the plugin and use DigiMarc as well, but I would think (hope!?) that there are many.
The workflow without being able to incorporate it from Lightroom, is a PITA.
David Devbobo are you back from Fiji? Hope you had a great time?
Other than hoping to get the 2.0.1.20 link, is there any chance that DigiMarc could be incorporated into your plugin? I have no idea what the stats are of SM clients that use the plugin and use DigiMarc as well, but I would think (hope!?) that there are many.
The workflow without being able to incorporate it from Lightroom, is a PITA.
Nothing to do with digimarc, but did you ever try this plugin ?
I can assure you that there are zero code differences between 2.0.1.20 and 2.0.2.1 in the area of image syncing...in fact it's only a 2 line change (see the attached screenshot from my commit to github).
That being said, I have come across a few other cornercases where things weren't working as expected since I've been back.
Please give 2.0.2.3 a go and let me know if it resolves the sync issues that you are seeing.
David Devbobo are you back from Fiji? Hope you had a great time?
Other than hoping to get the 2.0.1.20 link, is there any chance that DigiMarc could be incorporated into your plugin? I have no idea what the stats are of SM clients that use the plugin and use DigiMarc as well, but I would think (hope!?) that there are many.
The workflow without being able to incorporate it from Lightroom, is a PITA.
To support this properly, Adobe or DigiMarc need to create a Post-Process Action plugin to handle this.
After a bit of googling I found a video on youtube that showed how to do this from within LR with export to disk. This method makes use of a PS droplet that is running after the image has been exported to disk. Using the PS droplet and Jeffrey Friedl's "Run Any Command" plugin, you should be able to make it work with our plugin but it might take a bit of experimenting.
I'm getting a similar but somewhat different error to one reported earlier. It reads "An internal error has occurred ?:0: attempt to index field 'trimEnd' (a nil value)." This is with 2.0.2.3.
I'm getting a similar but somewhat different error to one reported earlier. It reads "An internal error has occurred ?:0: attempt to index field 'trimEnd' (a nil value)." This is with 2.0.2.3.
I tried 2.0.2.3 and the returned results are less than before. I have 418 images in a specific gallery and I am now only seeing 110 through the plugin.
I tried 2.0.2.3 and the returned results are less than before. I have 418 images in a specific gallery and I am now only seeing 110 through the plugin.
I gave sent you the log.
Thanks for the help.
Did you send the log or the catalog ? It's way better for me (and you) for me to have the catalog, so that I can run the sync and see what is going on/
Did you send the log or the catalog ? It's way better for me (and you) for me to have the catalog, so that I can run the sync and see what is going on/
So sorry - I sent the log and not the catalog. I will send the catalog now as well.
Thanks, David! Looks like the only ones that are not automatically syncing are the ones that I renamed on export by timestamp. It's successfully recognizing and matching camera, resolution, and time.
Thanks David, I've sent that in. I'm getting the error when I click on "Sync" under the smugmug settings, with all sync options checked.
Thanks for that
It seems that one of LR's SDK functions is throwing that error. I've added some code to catch that error, and have also passed details onto Adobe so they can fix it.
I'll post another version of the plugin a bit later today...as I'm still looking through a few other catalogs at a few syncing issues.
it should fix bkrodgers' error message and hopefully improve image syncing a little bit with help from using both AperturePlus' and bkrodgers' catalogs
I downloaded 2.0.2.4, and it fixed the null string error I saw with 2.0.2.3. However, the matching algorithm seems a little off, and it took me a few minutes to realize why. I have quite a few images for which it is suggesting seemingly odd choices. I am looking now at one image for which it is offering two matches. The first is a good match for Model and Dimensions, and a partial match for Filename (.CR2 file locally, and .jpg on SmugMug). Its Taken timestamp doesn't match - looks like I corrected for daylight savings time after pushing the image to SmugMug. This seems reasonable.
However, the plugin is suggesting another possible match, which matches only the Model and Dimensions. There is no check by the Filename. However, after looking a bit more closely, I see that the Filename almost matches - as above, it's a .CR2 locally and a .jpg on SmugMug, but now there is a case mismatch in the name of the file (IMG vs. img). That is not unreasonable, but the weak match without a visible check mark surprised me.
The two that you mentioned, had indeed changed filenames, hence that issue.
As for the corrupt Model metadata.. I use Photomatix for HDR processing and I have noticed that it does sometimes corrupt this data. I have not been able to replicate it and it seems to be on a random basis, but this fix would be good for everyone else experiencing this issue as a result of Photomatix.
Comments
That sounds like a very reasonable thing to do. I tried it as well. Unfortunately, the older version behaved exactly the same as the newer version. I think that either I did something wrong (like accidentally canceling the sync) or the server software changed. Certainly the server end of things has been changing over the last week, as the software team tries to fix bugs, add features, and respond to user issues.
David
when launched from the explorer context menu, I can't choose existing galleries.
Other than hoping to get the 2.0.1.20 link, is there any chance that DigiMarc could be incorporated into your plugin? I have no idea what the stats are of SM clients that use the plugin and use DigiMarc as well, but I would think (hope!?) that there are many.
The workflow without being able to incorporate it from Lightroom, is a PITA.
I can assure you that there are zero code differences between 2.0.1.20 and 2.0.2.1 in the area of image syncing...in fact it's only a 2 line change (see the attached screenshot from my commit to github).
That being said, I have come across a few other cornercases where things weren't working as expected since I've been back.
Please give 2.0.2.3 a go and let me know if it resolves the sync issues that you are seeing.
If not, please upload your zipped cataloges (.lrcat file only) to https://www.hightail.com/dropbox?dropbox=SmugMug with a link back to this thread in the description as a reference.
Cheers,
David
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
To support this properly, Adobe or DigiMarc need to create a Post-Process Action plugin to handle this.
After a bit of googling I found a video on youtube that showed how to do this from within LR with export to disk. This method makes use of a PS droplet that is running after the image has been exported to disk. Using the PS droplet and Jeffrey Friedl's "Run Any Command" plugin, you should be able to make it work with our plugin but it might take a bit of experimenting.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
David
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Please upload your zipped cataloges (.lrcat file only) to https://www.hightail.com/dropbox?dropbox=SmugMug with a link back to this thread in the description as a reference.
Please include a description of what actions you were doing...eg. syncing images for your entire account or an individual album, etc.
Thanks,
David
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Hi David
I tried 2.0.2.3 and the returned results are less than before. I have 418 images in a specific gallery and I am now only seeing 110 through the plugin.
I gave sent you the log.
Thanks for the help.
Did you send the log or the catalog ? It's way better for me (and you) for me to have the catalog, so that I can run the sync and see what is going on/
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
So sorry - I sent the log and not the catalog. I will send the catalog now as well.
I'll give it a try, and let you know - thanks! Hope you had a good time in Fiji!
David
Now - on to other issues!
Thanks David, I've sent that in. I'm getting the error when I click on "Sync" under the smugmug settings, with all sync options checked.
Thanks for that
It seems that one of LR's SDK functions is throwing that error. I've added some code to catch that error, and have also passed details onto Adobe so they can fix it.
I'll post another version of the plugin a bit later today...as I'm still looking through a few other catalogs at a few syncing issues.
Cheers,
David
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
it should fix bkrodgers' error message and hopefully improve image syncing a little bit with help from using both AperturePlus' and bkrodgers' catalogs
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Thank you for your unrelenting commitment!
I downloaded 2.0.2.4, and it fixed the null string error I saw with 2.0.2.3. However, the matching algorithm seems a little off, and it took me a few minutes to realize why. I have quite a few images for which it is suggesting seemingly odd choices. I am looking now at one image for which it is offering two matches. The first is a good match for Model and Dimensions, and a partial match for Filename (.CR2 file locally, and .jpg on SmugMug). Its Taken timestamp doesn't match - looks like I corrected for daylight savings time after pushing the image to SmugMug. This seems reasonable.
However, the plugin is suggesting another possible match, which matches only the Model and Dimensions. There is no check by the Filename. However, after looking a bit more closely, I see that the Filename almost matches - as above, it's a .CR2 locally and a .jpg on SmugMug, but now there is a case mismatch in the name of the file (IMG vs. img). That is not unreasonable, but the weak match without a visible check mark surprised me.
Is this the expected behavior?
Thanks!
David
Could you be more specific? Are you getting error messages? Did the hierarchy sync successfully?
No it didn't sync successfully. The sync was off and in the middle came back saying couldn't complete.
Of the 13 missing images, 11 of them have a corrupt Model in the metadata, along the lines of this...
I've added some new code to look for non-ascii chars in the Model and ignore the entry if it does.
The final 2 images...don't have sufficient metadata and I'm guessing the filenames on SM are different to the ones in LR.
http://www.apertureplus.com/Everything-Gallery/i-ghBBBjm
http://www.apertureplus.com/Everything-Gallery/i-9pQ2M5L
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
As always, I'm more than happy to take a look at your catalog.
Please upload your zipped catalog (.lrcat file only) to https://www.hightail.com/dropbox?dropbox=SmugMug with a link back to this thread in the description as a reference.
Cheers,
David
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Fixes issue described here.
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Success! Thank you so very much for this.
The two that you mentioned, had indeed changed filenames, hence that issue.
As for the corrupt Model metadata.. I use Photomatix for HDR processing and I have noticed that it does sometimes corrupt this data. I have not been able to replicate it and it seems to be on a random basis, but this fix would be good for everyone else experiencing this issue as a result of Photomatix.