Using Chrome, just installed Nick's Chrome ext and worked well in my test gallery. Very slick!
Acadiana Al
Smugmug: Bayou Oaks Studio
Blog: Journey to the Light
"Serendipity...the faculty of making happy, unexpected discoveries by accident." .... Horace Walpole, 1754 (perhaps that 'lucky shot' wasn't really luck at all!)
If you're sync'ing/publishing with LR/SM then any changes in SM should be sync'd down to LR.
Aaron, are you sure of that? I know gallery descriptions get sync'd down, but I've never been able to push picture captions edited in SM back down to LR. It would be really nice if they did, since I can spell check in SM and not in LR ... and I'm one of those unfortunate folks who produce typos right and left.
"Not logged in" error
I just re-installed Chrome and the SmugMug extension on my new computer (Win 7 Pro 64-bit)
I have refreshed Chrome and ensured I am logged in as the owner of my SmugMug site:
invisionworkshop.com
But I still get this message: "It looks like you are not currently logged in" etc.
I followed the instruction posted earlier to make sure I have the latest version of the plugin, but it is already at 0.4.0.13.
If it makes any difference, I am still on Legacy version of Smugmug; I'm actually trying to use the plugin to restore settings I saved with the plugin a few months ago when I was trying out the Smugmug Demo.
Any Ideas?
Oops - scratch ALL of the above!
As soon as I switched to the "New Smugmug Preview" it started working - duh.
I am going to post this anyway; it might help another dunce - I know you're out there ;-)
Interesting caption behavior with HTML
Still totally loving this tool, and it did a big "save" for me today. I added <p> tags in a photo caption, on the gallery itself, not using the tool. I'm not actually sure that's allowed, but it looks right in the gallery. I didn't add <html> tags or other code. However now I cannot edit the captions (still in the SM gallery itself). The 'edit' icon is not working. I've tried in FF and Chrome, resized the windows, hunted around to see if the clickable area is located nearby, refreshed the browser, etc. Cannot open the caption to edit. I did this with both captions of the videos on the page and the same behavior results.
I just noticed (and it could have been there all this time and I didn't see it), that when I use the back-up tool, lines populate beneath the HTML and CSS fields-with-code:
"UnsafeHTML"
and
"UnsafeCSS"
All HTML and CSS in one - something?
Nicholas, I continue to use the back-up tool to proofread code. It is awesome. For example, for some galleries I mistakenly put "scroll" instead of "fixed" as part of the CSS code for the background image.
To find where I did this:
- Ctrl-f in Chrome and type "scroll" in the search field.
- Left-click a gallery title to access all content in the gallery
- Left-click the Chrome search next arrow to find any/all instances of "scroll" in a gallery (any where - any field).
- Left-click the next gallery title to access it.
- Left-click the Chrome search next arrow to find any/all instances of "scroll" in a gallery (any where - any field).
- Etc.
Mostly I get zero results, so I can just proceed with checking all galleries.
While this is much more speedy than manually opening each gallery inside Smugmug Customize, and checking each page's CSS, I was j-u-s-t w-on-der-ing.
Would it be possible in your tool to have a tab that collects all HTML and CSS fields in one screen? Not like all the code in one .txt file (although that would be nice, but I assume that's not possible), but all the screens that you do offer, in the format that you offer, but repeated again in a separate tab, one after the other?
The goal being to facilitate code review/proofreading in the most efficient manner.
Thanks.
ChancyRat: From memory, I think if you entered unsafe HTML code into a block (e.g. a tag), it'd get removed from your HTML block when you saved your changes, from both the view shown to the public and the code editor (so all the code got erased and there was no opportunity for you to edit it further or recover the code you wrote).
It looks like now your code gets remembered without modification as UnsafeHTML, so that your intact code will continue to be shown in the code editor and there's no data loss. The sanitised version with tags removed ends up in the regular "HTML" section, which is what will be shown to the public.
Unfortunately I'm occupied with other things right now, but you might find it useful to drag and drop the .json backup file on to your web browser instead. That's the raw code behind the backup, but you should be able to use your browser to find text in it. Hopefully by looking close to the match, you can figure out what page it came from.
ChancyRat: From memory, I think if you entered unsafe HTML code into a block (e.g. a <script> tag), it'd get removed from your HTML block when you saved your changes, from both the view shown to the public and the code editor (so all the code got erased and there was no opportunity for you to edit it further or recover the code you wrote).
It looks like now your code gets remembered without modification as UnsafeHTML, so that your intact code will continue to be shown in the code editor and there's no data loss. The sanitised version with <script> tags removed ends up in the regular "HTML" section, which is what will be shown to the public.
Thanks for this info. Maybe the code is allowed, or maybe Allen's oft-warning about "open the field to edit and the code will be stripped" still applies, and may lack of editing is what's keeping it alive? I will have to look deeper at which material has those errors. Thank you!
...you might find it useful to drag and drop the .json backup file on to your web browser instead. That's the raw code behind the backup, but you should be able to use your browser to find text in it. Hopefully by looking close to the match, you can figure out what page it came from.
Looks like SmugMug is (on at least one person's site) now using "HTTPS" links for galleries when you view their site with their .smugmug.com domain name. This breaks the bulk editor, because it's currently set to only be made available on HTTP pages. For the moment, you can solve this by editing the URL in your address bar to replace "https://" with "http://".
Looks like SmugMug is (on at least one person's site) now using "HTTPS" links for galleries when you view their site with their .smugmug.com domain name. This breaks the bulk editor, because it's currently set to only be made available on HTTP pages. For the moment, you can solve this by editing the URL in your address bar to replace "https://" with "http://".
Good eye! We're in the process of moving all of SmugMug to using https. Custom Domains will be also move to https at some point in the near future.
This problem with HTTPS links should now be fixed in the bulk customiser version 0.4.1!
Chrome will auto-update to that version after a few hours, but you can speed it up by updating manually. Click the Chrome main menu button, then Tools -> Extensions. Tick the "developer mode" tickbox at the top right, then click the "Update extensions now" button. You should see the version number next to the "Unofficial SmugMug extension for Chrome" tick over to 0.4.1 after a few minutes.
This problem with HTTPS links should now be fixed in the bulk customiser version 0.4.1!
Chrome will auto-update to that version after a few hours, but you can speed it up by updating manually. Click the Chrome main menu button, then Tools -> Extensions. Tick the "developer mode" tickbox at the top right, then click the "Update extensions now" button. You should see the version number next to the "Unofficial SmugMug extension for Chrome" tick over to 0.4.1 after a few minutes.
Did the update and it works again. What a time saving tool this thing is. Thanks, Nick!
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
You are correct. I only use it for bulk-editing of captions etc, but it isn't working for me now. But this has only happened within the last five minutes. What has SmugMug changed Aaron?
You are correct. I only use it for bulk-editing of captions etc, but it isn't working for me now. But this has only happened within the last five minutes. What has SmugMug changed Aaron?
Minutes ago, I edited titles, captions and keywords for an entire gallery with Nick's tool and it worked perfectly.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
That makes all the following posts look a little stupid. It would have been better to leave it there to provide a context for what follows. No one reading the thread could be confused, unless they read your single post out of context.
Nick's tool has been broken before due to SM's sorcerers, but he has responded within the same day to fix things. I'm never worried about it due to his quick response time. That, and as a backup, I can always use SM's own methods, as kludgy as they are.
My Smugmug
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
It was definitely not working! However I agree it is now. You weren't imagining things Allen.
I would still like to know from Aaron what the engineers were doing at that moment.
That makes all the following posts look a little stupid. It would have been better to leave it there to provide a context for what follows. No one reading the thread could be confused, unless they read your single post out of context.
Undeeeeeeleted post. Thought I deleted it pretty quick but apparently not. You peeps are too quick
reading these posts.
Nick's tool has been broken before due to SM's sorcerers, but he has responded within the same day to fix things. I'm never worried about it due to his quick response time. That, and as a backup, I can always use SM's own methods, as kludgy as they are.
I'm actually always worried about this, David, because Aaron many times has reiterated with vigor that the Legacy back end *will* go *down*, and I believe Nick's tool accesses the Legacy back end system to generate its magic.
Actually I have a very long thread in draft form about the batch editor tool and how important it is that SmugMug fix this - either by permanently committing to Nick's Chrome tool, or by inventing an entirely new tool. We have Baldy's promise that SM would make a batch edit tool (Baldy reiterated that the concept is for batch editing, not "bulk", so I'm going to try to stick with "batch"), but we also have the extremely poorly designed current keyword tool that is almost useless by my measure, and we have SM's historically painful association to the Legacy tool. Up until I left Legacy, that keyword tool was buggy. I don't know what Nick's tool did, but despite accessing the Legacy back end, it has No Bugs, and yet has every feature the Legacy system had, with excellent functionality.
Anyway, every time I read Aaron's comments about the eventual demise of the the Legacy back end, or I read how new features collapse advanced function into minimalist 'averages', my fingers move urgently to the keyboard to resurrect the discussion of "where's the new batch edit tool".
I'll go ahead and make the summary point here: Not having a robust, advanced, batch keyword edit tool is like deciding to not offer gallery titles, or photo captions, or keywords. No one in their right mind would buy into a company that prohibits the addition of gallery titles. Not being able to batch edit keywords is exactly the same. I'm sure many many users don't have photo captions for all of their photos, but should they decide to add them, or change them, the capability *must* be there for them. Ditto batch editing keywords. The scenario that might better explain this is if a site is organized a certain way, with both gallery/folder titles, and keywords, and down the road the owner decides to re-vamp contents quite significantly. This must be doable.
I don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling that SmugMug has this level of understanding or commitment. Allen's experience of a function failure, albeit for just a moment, sends shivers down my back.
Actually I have a very long thread in draft form about the batch editor tool and how important it is that SmugMug fix this - either by permanently committing to Nick's Chrome tool, or by inventing an entirely new tool. We have Baldy's promise that SM would make a batch edit tool ...
I hope you are right, but I'm not at all sure Baldy is convinced about the need for a batch editor. To the contrary, at the time of the introduction of SmugMug 2.0, he was saying nothing is broken, only a few zealots on these forums want this (as opposed to large numbers of users SM had surveyed), and that he wouldn't contemplate it without seeing a 'use case'. He's had a couple of years to deliver it and I haven't seen any signs.
Gosh, I didn't even know this tool existed. Stupid me. I had gotten very quick & talented at the Legacy editor, so I thought it was just me being a luddite & thinking the New SmugMug one is incredibly klunky. I find it crazy-making & very tough to figure out. I've accidentally removed stuff I wanted to keep (keywords & captions) lots of times. I'm relieved to hear lots of people think it's klunky. Well, I sure hope this tool keeps on working since I haven't even tried it yet. Incidentally, what, pray tell, is the difference between "batch" & "bulk" keyword editing, or any editing?!
Incidentally, what, pray tell, is the difference between "batch" & "bulk" keyword editing, or any editing?!
In this context, 'batch' and 'bulk' are interchangeable terms. It's about being able to see, and edit, multiple image titles, captions and keywords at the same time, rather than image by image.
In this context, 'batch' and 'bulk' are interchangeable terms. It's about being able to see, and edit, multiple image titles, captions and keywords at the same time, rather than image by image.
Here are a couple of the historical discussions on DG, including Baldy's distinctions between batch and bulk.
Question:
What program are you using to edit your photos? (lightroom, Aperture) to spend so much time in SM bulk edit tool to keyword etc, In my work flow that tool is only used to correct a mistake every now and then. To send time editing, key-wording, caption etc in one program and then spend time in SM is not productive, that is what my under standing of that tool is.
Your throughs
Question:
What program are you using to edit your photos? (lightroom, Aperture) to spend so much time in SM bulk edit tool to keyword etc, In my work flow that tool is only used to correct a mistake every now and then. To send time editing, key-wording, caption etc in one program and then spend time in SM is not productive, that is what my under standing of that tool is.
Your throughs
I think you might be speaking to me, Djm?
Yes, a correction now and then, or adding a few new keywords or captions to newly added photos, doesn't need the batch editing tool that was Legacy's, um, legacy, and is now Nicholas' gift to us.
Suggesting that I use Lightroom or another software, though, misses the point, in my opinion:
1. Users should not have to use another tool. Users who never used another tool, but have many years of work invested in their site using the batch edit tool, have to be accommodated.
2. Decisions to reorganize a site, or re-organize keywords en masse, or add captions to large sets of photos where there were none before, have to be accommodated.
3. Sites can be organic, growing creatures that evolve into new entities as time goes by. Growth and changes of substance have to be planned for and accommodated.
4. Users with many years' historic connection to Smugmug, were given all of the above. It's not ethical to pull the rug out from under us.
Comments
Smugmug: Bayou Oaks Studio
Blog: Journey to the Light
"Serendipity...the faculty of making happy, unexpected discoveries by accident." .... Horace Walpole, 1754 (perhaps that 'lucky shot' wasn't really luck at all!)
Aaron, are you sure of that? I know gallery descriptions get sync'd down, but I've never been able to push picture captions edited in SM back down to LR. It would be really nice if they did, since I can spell check in SM and not in LR ... and I'm one of those unfortunate folks who produce typos right and left.
Former SmugMug Product Team
aaron AT aaronmphotography DOT com
Website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com
My SmugMug CSS Customizations website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com/Customizations
I just re-installed Chrome and the SmugMug extension on my new computer (Win 7 Pro 64-bit)
I have refreshed Chrome and ensured I am logged in as the owner of my SmugMug site:
invisionworkshop.com
But I still get this message: "It looks like you are not currently logged in" etc.
I followed the instruction posted earlier to make sure I have the latest version of the plugin, but it is already at 0.4.0.13.
If it makes any difference, I am still on Legacy version of Smugmug; I'm actually trying to use the plugin to restore settings I saved with the plugin a few months ago when I was trying out the Smugmug Demo.
Any Ideas?
Oops - scratch ALL of the above!
As soon as I switched to the "New Smugmug Preview" it started working - duh.
I am going to post this anyway; it might help another dunce - I know you're out there ;-)
Or perhaps a note on this page letting us know the plugin only works with the new Smugmug, not Legacy:
http://www.sherlockphotography.org/Customisations/SmugMug-for-Chrome
Thanks - Sam
Still totally loving this tool, and it did a big "save" for me today. I added <p> tags in a photo caption, on the gallery itself, not using the tool. I'm not actually sure that's allowed, but it looks right in the gallery. I didn't add <html> tags or other code. However now I cannot edit the captions (still in the SM gallery itself). The 'edit' icon is not working. I've tried in FF and Chrome, resized the windows, hunted around to see if the clickable area is located nearby, refreshed the browser, etc. Cannot open the caption to edit. I did this with both captions of the videos on the page and the same behavior results.
http://www.joinrats.com/RatHealth/Ratexams/Vetratexams/i-dXqvvFs
I have currently left in the tags.
But - this tool saved me because by using it I can access the captions and remove the tags. LOVE IT.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
"UnsafeHTML"
and
"UnsafeCSS"
What do these mean?
Thanks.
Nicholas, I continue to use the back-up tool to proofread code. It is awesome. For example, for some galleries I mistakenly put "scroll" instead of "fixed" as part of the CSS code for the background image.
To find where I did this:
- Ctrl-f in Chrome and type "scroll" in the search field.
- Left-click a gallery title to access all content in the gallery
- Left-click the Chrome search next arrow to find any/all instances of "scroll" in a gallery (any where - any field).
- Left-click the next gallery title to access it.
- Left-click the Chrome search next arrow to find any/all instances of "scroll" in a gallery (any where - any field).
- Etc.
Mostly I get zero results, so I can just proceed with checking all galleries.
While this is much more speedy than manually opening each gallery inside Smugmug Customize, and checking each page's CSS, I was j-u-s-t w-on-der-ing.
Would it be possible in your tool to have a tab that collects all HTML and CSS fields in one screen? Not like all the code in one .txt file (although that would be nice, but I assume that's not possible), but all the screens that you do offer, in the format that you offer, but repeated again in a separate tab, one after the other?
The goal being to facilitate code review/proofreading in the most efficient manner.
Thanks.
It looks like now your code gets remembered without modification as UnsafeHTML, so that your intact code will continue to be shown in the code editor and there's no data loss. The sanitised version with tags removed ends up in the regular "HTML" section, which is what will be shown to the public.
Unfortunately I'm occupied with other things right now, but you might find it useful to drag and drop the .json backup file on to your web browser instead. That's the raw code behind the backup, but you should be able to use your browser to find text in it. Hopefully by looking close to the match, you can figure out what page it came from.
Please check out my gallery of customisations for the New SmugMug, more to come!
Thanks for this info. Maybe the code is allowed, or maybe Allen's oft-warning about "open the field to edit and the code will be stripped" still applies, and may lack of editing is what's keeping it alive? I will have to look deeper at which material has those errors. Thank you!
Wonderful! Thank you, I had no idea.
Please check out my gallery of customisations for the New SmugMug, more to come!
Good eye! We're in the process of moving all of SmugMug to using https. Custom Domains will be also move to https at some point in the near future.
Nick, look out for a PM from me!
Former SmugMug Product Team
aaron AT aaronmphotography DOT com
Website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com
My SmugMug CSS Customizations website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com/Customizations
Chrome will auto-update to that version after a few hours, but you can speed it up by updating manually. Click the Chrome main menu button, then Tools -> Extensions. Tick the "developer mode" tickbox at the top right, then click the "Update extensions now" button. You should see the version number next to the "Unofficial SmugMug extension for Chrome" tick over to 0.4.1 after a few minutes.
Please check out my gallery of customisations for the New SmugMug, more to come!
Did the update and it works again. What a time saving tool this thing is. Thanks, Nick!
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Edit: undeleted post.
My Website index | My Blog
Minutes ago, I edited titles, captions and keywords for an entire gallery with Nick's tool and it worked perfectly.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
My Website index | My Blog
It was definitely not working! However I agree it is now. You weren't imagining things Allen.
I would still like to know from Aaron what the engineers were doing at that moment.
That makes all the following posts look a little stupid. It would have been better to leave it there to provide a context for what follows. No one reading the thread could be confused, unless they read your single post out of context.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
reading these posts.
My Website index | My Blog
I'm actually always worried about this, David, because Aaron many times has reiterated with vigor that the Legacy back end *will* go *down*, and I believe Nick's tool accesses the Legacy back end system to generate its magic.
Actually I have a very long thread in draft form about the batch editor tool and how important it is that SmugMug fix this - either by permanently committing to Nick's Chrome tool, or by inventing an entirely new tool. We have Baldy's promise that SM would make a batch edit tool (Baldy reiterated that the concept is for batch editing, not "bulk", so I'm going to try to stick with "batch"), but we also have the extremely poorly designed current keyword tool that is almost useless by my measure, and we have SM's historically painful association to the Legacy tool. Up until I left Legacy, that keyword tool was buggy. I don't know what Nick's tool did, but despite accessing the Legacy back end, it has No Bugs, and yet has every feature the Legacy system had, with excellent functionality.
Anyway, every time I read Aaron's comments about the eventual demise of the the Legacy back end, or I read how new features collapse advanced function into minimalist 'averages', my fingers move urgently to the keyboard to resurrect the discussion of "where's the new batch edit tool".
I'll go ahead and make the summary point here: Not having a robust, advanced, batch keyword edit tool is like deciding to not offer gallery titles, or photo captions, or keywords. No one in their right mind would buy into a company that prohibits the addition of gallery titles. Not being able to batch edit keywords is exactly the same. I'm sure many many users don't have photo captions for all of their photos, but should they decide to add them, or change them, the capability *must* be there for them. Ditto batch editing keywords. The scenario that might better explain this is if a site is organized a certain way, with both gallery/folder titles, and keywords, and down the road the owner decides to re-vamp contents quite significantly. This must be doable.
I don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling that SmugMug has this level of understanding or commitment. Allen's experience of a function failure, albeit for just a moment, sends shivers down my back.
T
If my understanding is incorrect, Aaron will jump in and put me straight but I'm not holding my breath!
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Here are a couple of the historical discussions on DG, including Baldy's distinctions between batch and bulk.
http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1956022&postcount=58
http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1956168&postcount=72,
http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1955669&postcount=116
What program are you using to edit your photos? (lightroom, Aperture) to spend so much time in SM bulk edit tool to keyword etc, In my work flow that tool is only used to correct a mistake every now and then. To send time editing, key-wording, caption etc in one program and then spend time in SM is not productive, that is what my under standing of that tool is.
Your throughs
Instagram
Twitter
I think you might be speaking to me, Djm?
Yes, a correction now and then, or adding a few new keywords or captions to newly added photos, doesn't need the batch editing tool that was Legacy's, um, legacy, and is now Nicholas' gift to us.
Suggesting that I use Lightroom or another software, though, misses the point, in my opinion:
1. Users should not have to use another tool. Users who never used another tool, but have many years of work invested in their site using the batch edit tool, have to be accommodated.
2. Decisions to reorganize a site, or re-organize keywords en masse, or add captions to large sets of photos where there were none before, have to be accommodated.
3. Sites can be organic, growing creatures that evolve into new entities as time goes by. Growth and changes of substance have to be planned for and accommodated.
4. Users with many years' historic connection to Smugmug, were given all of the above. It's not ethical to pull the rug out from under us.
In my humble opinion ...