When can we final ycopy files in the organizer?

afx

Hi,

why do we still have to use a cumbersome process switching between gallery and organizer to copy and then move files?
Why can't that be done right away in the organizer?
The current process is a major PITA!

cheers
afx

pilotdave

afx wrote: »

Hi,

why do we still have to use a cumbersome process switching between gallery and organizer to copy and then move files?
Why can't that be done right away in the organizer?
The current process is a major PITA!

cheers
afx

I've always suspected that smugmug really really doesn't want us copying files because we'd use more storage. The fact that they didn't include this in new smug is a strong indication that I'm right. I think they are mostly afraid people would use copy in cases where smart galleries or collections would work just as well. But there are so many situations where a copy is required. And with the removal of bulk collecting, well... that's just not reasonable if you need to collect more than one photo at a time. Using "make a copy" and moving with the organizer is not a good way to do it... aside from being a very annoying long process, you can't tell the original from the copy. This means you might move the wrong one and break links, reset popularity, etc.

The only reasonable way to do it is to download the image you want to copy and upload it to the other gallery. Well, that's not particularly reasonable, but it's probably quicker than trying to copy and move and less error prone.

I've said a few times... if smugmug developers used smugmug like customers do, this would get fixed in 10 minutes.

Dave

dennismullen

pilotdave wrote: »

I've always suspected that smugmug really really doesn't want us copying files because we'd use more storage. The fact that they didn't include this in new smug is a strong indication that I'm right. I think they are mostly afraid people would use copy in cases where smart galleries or collections would work just as well. But there are so many situations where a copy is required. And with the removal of bulk collecting, well... that's just not reasonable if you need to collect more than one photo at a time. Using "make a copy" and moving with the organizer is not a good way to do it... aside from being a very annoying long process, you can't tell the original from the copy. This means you might move the wrong one and break links, reset popularity, etc.

The only reasonable way to do it is to download the image you want to copy and upload it to the other gallery. Well, that's not particularly reasonable, but it's probably quicker than trying to copy and move and less error prone.

I've said a few times... if smugmug developers used smugmug like customers do, this would get fixed in 10 minutes.

Dave

Storage and bandwidth, also the reason "Original Size" in no longer one of the display sizes which have become highly compressed.
Many of the missing "features" affect workflow. It does seem like the developers don't use the program on a day to day basis.

Cheers,

Andy

dennismullen wrote: »

Storage and bandwidth, also the reason "Original Size" in no longer one of the display sizes which have become highly compressed.
Many of the missing "features" affect workflow. It does seem like the developers don't use the program on a day to day basis.

Cheers,

Both of these statements are completely wrong.

pilotdave

Andy wrote: »

Both of these statements are completely wrong.

Obviously they use it, but apparently not like I do. Smugmug developers would not like new smug if they used it like me. It's slow and difficult and missing features they would have been used to using on a daily basis. They would still be using legacy mode for a lot of their work because it's easier and quicker to use. To me, new smug is a great looking downgrade.

Dave