Can we really put content blocks below the photos section in Smugmug style?

ChancyRat

I'm not unveiled yet so I don't know what to believe.
I have, in vertical order:

text block
HTML block
[then comes the locked SM gallery description which I plan to delete after I unveil]
[then comes the Smugmug style thumbs on left and main photo on right]
HTML block
HTML block

Can we really lodge content blocks below the SM gallery description and photo block?
In Legacy I believe we couldn't do that without - was it java? - to switch the description to below the photos area.

This is cool if it is so.

denisegoldberg

ChancyRat wrote: »

Can we really lodge content blocks below the SM gallery description and photo block?
In Legacy I believe we couldn't do that without - was it java? - to switch the description to below the photos area.

In legacy you were probably using javascript.

Are you asking if you can put a block between the gallery description and the gallery content? I believe the answer to that is no.

If you have successfully placed content blocks below the photo block and it works then it should also work when you unveil. You might want to rethink that though. The rules haven't changed relative to smugmug-style galleries. The largest photo that fits in the available vertical space in the browser window below your site header and any other content you place above the gallery determines how much space is reserved for the photo on the right. If you have a lot of content above the gallery this will minimize the space available for the photos. If you have content below the photos your viewers will need to scroll to see that content. Do you think they will scroll? I probably wouldn't - if I am wandering through photos on a page, why would I scroll below the photos (which I assume are the primary content)? Maybe your viewers will scroll below the photos, might be worth watching someone access your site (without giving them any hints).

--- Denise

ChancyRat

Yes, Denise, this is what I was referring to (I had never used that java to reverse placement, I just remember reading threads that described it):

If you have successfully placed content blocks below the photo block and it works then it should also work when you unveil.

I did not know about this rule, but also still can't conceptualize what it means for SM style:

The rules haven't changed relative to smugmug-style galleries. The largest photo that fits in the available vertical space in the browser window below your site header and any other content you place above the gallery determines how much space is reserved for the photo on the right. If you have a lot of content above the gallery this will minimize the space available for the photos.

because in my case I do have a lot of content above the SM photo block (thumbs and main). I guess I will see what happens when I unveil.

Finally, in terms of,

If you have content below the photos your viewers will need to scroll to see that content. Do you think they will scroll?

, I have a comment at the top of the gallery indicating the item that can be viewed below the photos by scrolling down. I will be careful to pick and choose when I lay out content this way, because of what you describe.

All in all I think it's great that SM now allows content above and below the main photo block.

Now if Smug would just make video play in lightbox mode, and in other than SM style, because I really would like to take advantage of the other styles. Feels quite cramped to be limited to only one style.

denisegoldberg

ChancyRat wrote: »

...because in my case I do have a lot of content above the SM photo block (thumbs and main). I guess I will see what happens when I unveil.

OK, I just did a quick test and the size of the image on the right didn't change - so this appears to be different than the legacy behavior.

I added a gallery description that used a big chunk of vertical space. What happened was that the gallery content was only half showing, I had to scroll to see the content. But I measured the image on the right and it was the same size regardless of the amount of text. So I think your setup should be OK.

--- Denise

ChancyRat

Oh nice. Do you mean you tested this with a content block below the photos?

denisegoldberg

ChancyRat wrote: »

Oh nice. Do you mean you tested this with a content block below the photos?

No - I tested with a long description to check the size of the large photo in smugmug-style gallery.

--- Denise