BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited February 18, 2007
Great feedback, everyone. Papajay: the plan is to automatically display the right sizes without adding to the UI by sensing available area in the browser.
Jfriend: I think we'll start generating the XL sizes soon so we'll have them available for recent galleries when the themes are ready.
It seems one thing we need is a way for people go to to past galleries and generate these sizes. People with hundreds of galleries aren't going to want to do this one at a time, and it isn't clear right now what you'd do to trigger it.
As for how fast we can get past galleries done, I don't think we have enough metrics yet to know. When we did custom watermarks, the rush to go back to old galleries and re-do watermarks created an enormous server load for a long time.
One idea is to "invite" customers to update their galleries, but putting a message in their control panel or sending them an email, this way you can stage it...just don't invite everyone at once.
If you shoot Dev the right info, so his SmugBrowser can be updated, Smugbrowser would be a very fast and easy way for users to turn on the XL sizes. I know generating them is a different story. But the SMBrowser could be the switch to let you know they need to be generated...
Oh ya... he needs some other info for Smugbrowser to work w/ custom watermarks (an api method to retrieve the list of watermarks) was his statement...
Have a nice day...
(snip...)
It seems one thing we need is a way for people go to to past galleries and generate these sizes. People with hundreds of galleries aren't going to want to do this one at a time, and it isn't clear right now what you'd do to trigger it.
(snip...)
It seems that there are many gallery-level functionalities which people would like to be able to change for more than one gallery at a time. Not to add to your workload, but maybe this is the perfect time to introduce an interface for multi-gallery changes. The "upsize to gigantor" button could be one of many features here.
i'd like to offer people 1000-1200px size images to use as wallpaper, not really interested in going any larger at the moment.
i know you can set the digital download up and i've done that for quite cheap, however it's still an effort that my users wouldn't bother going to, but i'd like them to enjoy my pics on their desktop without feeling like i'm seeing them as revenue. :cry
anyhoo, this response is half just to subscribe to the topic...
i'd like to offer people 1000-1200px size images to use as wallpaper, not really interested in going any larger at the moment.
i know you can set the digital download up and i've done that for quite cheap, however it's still an effort that my users wouldn't bother going to, but i'd like them to enjoy my pics on their desktop without feeling like i'm seeing them as revenue. :cry
anyhoo, this response is half just to subscribe to the topic...
Any guesses/hints on a timeframe? It's been nearly 11 months since the XL topic first came up and, checking every few days for something that comes close to filling a 1680x1050 monitor, it feels like forever.
Any guesses/hints on a timeframe? It's been nearly 11 months since the XL topic first came up and, checking every few days for something that comes close to filling a 1680x1050 monitor, it feels like forever.
Hi, we don't comment on timeframes. But I think the fact that we're discussing it openly here on our forum should tell you how important it is to us, too
And changing the -L to a -XL...
In Firefox, I get , and I never get a response. This, as opposed to changing it to -Foo, which promptly results in:
At first I was hoping that if I directly accessed a -XL it would generate a nice, cleanly reduced file. (-1024x1024 looked kinda jpeg-ey, if you know what I mean.)
Anyway, what's with the -XL behavior? Just curious!
The plan is, if anyone has blocked either large or original, keep the larger display sizes off. Otherwise, enable them. This means that anyone who blocks original will have to proactively turn on larger display sizes to get them to show.
From my point of view, if I'm understanding you correctly, that's a bit problematic. I'm an amateur photographer - I don't sell my prints or expect to make money off of them, so I'm all for showing people an XL size. But I also think it's important that only I have the original unless I want to share it with people. So on my account, I have LARGE turned on but ORIGINAL turned off. That would seem to mean that I won't get the option for XL...is that correct? If so, that's not a great solution for me, and I would suspect, many others. There's a big difference between offering someone an XL size image (what, 1280 wide?) and the original 12 megapixel image. I don't see why the two should be linked.
From my point of view, if I'm understanding you correctly, that's a bit problematic. I'm an amateur photographer - I don't sell my prints or expect to make money off of them, so I'm all for showing people an XL size. But I also think it's important that only I have the original unless I want to share it with people. So on my account, I have LARGE turned on but ORIGINAL turned off. That would seem to mean that I won't get the option for XL...is that correct?
No, the XL function will be off by default for you, in this case. You will still be able to select them to show
We do plan to make the larger display sizes when you upload new images to old galleries and when you replace photos. If that was the only way in the beginning to generate large photos in old galleries while we made sure all sytems were bullet proof for the 30,000 images we receive an hour now, would the world end?
I think that's perfectly reasonable as a first step - if I understand correctly, in order to get the XL size on a gallery I'd need to add one new dummy image to that gallery, then it would generate the XL size of all images in the gallery. Then I could delete the dummy image I just uploaded and my gallery would be back to normal, just in XL size.
I personally don't have that many galleries uploaded so this wouldn't take me very long. In fact, I suspect no more than 30 seconds total per gallery, so even for someone with quite a few galleries this wouldn't be too bad. Sure, not as ideal as you guys doing it all server side, but I think any rational person understands the problem you're facing.
Folks, there will actually be 3 new image sizes: XL, X2 and X3. I posted samples of X3 at the top of this thread. The idea is they smoothly fit your browser window as you enlarge just like the transition between smugmug small and smugmug does now.
I think it's great that you guys are using this opportunity to think ahead and address this issue for the next few years.
The bad news is incorporating them into galleries is going to take time because we have to modify all themes. It's gonna mean art, CSS changes, etc. Those changes could take a long time.
As a graphic designer, may I suggest you bin a whole bunch of those themes instead of resizing them... I feel bad saying it, but most of those themes are criminal... We need more themes like "Fresh Air", not themes that clash with the matter at hand - our photos...
I would recommend spending some time on a couple new themes (maximum 5) instead, and get them to work with the new sizes... Force everyone using themes into a default new theme (the most elegant / non-offensive / one you think works best) and then they're left with a choice of 4 other themes to choose from if they object... You can then start adding more themes at a later date if you insist... But having fewer themes allows you to be more flexible in the future when you face cross-roads like this one!
I know forcing people into a theme isn't the kindest way of doing things, but if people are that concerned they should be using customised CSS anyway... Most using the themes are likely to be standard users (like myself) and won't be terribly bothered as long as it's not 'criminal'... Standard users are probably not trying to run a business through SmugMug, so branding issues are much less important... However, standard users still like to feel good about themselves / their site...
The amount of themes you currently offer may be impressive, but unfortunately the quality of said themes is not... Rather drastically reduce the number of themes and make sure that the few themes you offer are of excellent quality!
As a graphic designer, may I suggest you bin a whole bunch of those themes instead of resizing them... I feel bad saying it, but most of those themes are criminal... We need more themes like "Fresh Air", not themes that clash with the matter at hand - our photos...
I would recommend spending some time on a couple new themes (maximum 5) instead, and get them to work with the new sizes... Force everyone using themes into a default new theme (the most elegant / non-offensive / one you think works best) and then they're left with a choice of 4 other themes to choose from if they object... You can then start adding more themes at a later date if you insist... But having fewer themes allows you to be more flexible in the future when you face cross-roads like this one!
I know forcing people into a theme isn't the kindest way of doing things, but if people are that concerned they should be using customised CSS anyway... Most using the themes are likely to be standard users (like myself) and won't be terribly bothered as long as it's not 'criminal'... Standard users are probably not trying to run a business through SmugMug, so branding issues are much less important... However, standard users still like to feel good about themselves / their site...
The amount of themes you currently offer may be impressive, but unfortunately the quality of said themes is not... Rather drastically reduce the number of themes and make sure that the few themes you offer are of excellent quality!
Great feedback - and as the guy responsible for this I'd love to get some more from you. Care to spend a few minutes with my on the phone tomorrow or early next week? PM me your # and a time we could talk (give your time zone, too pls)... thanks!
Force everyone using themes into a default new theme (the most elegant / non-offensive / one you think works best)
I know forcing people into a theme isn't the kindest way of doing things, but if people are that concerned they should be using customised CSS anyway... Most using the themes are likely to be standard users ... and won't be terribly bothered as long as it's not 'criminal'... Standard users are probably not trying to run a business through SmugMug, so branding issues are much less important... However, standard users still like to feel good about themselves / their site...
First off, please speak for yourself and not all of us using SM. I do NOT like being forced into anything. A person or company who forces me to do something looses my business.
We spend a lot of time adjusting our sites to suit our needs/wants - just to have someone force a theme onto us? Not all of us (including myself) are CSS or coding gurus. Again, I spend all that time to customise my site to have something forced on to me? Uh uh - ain't gunna happen.
Branding issues are much less important? Seriously - I really must be missing something (granted I just crawled out of bed so may not be thinking straight) - but as I've already mentioned we spend a lot of time creating our perfect site with a lot of help from the forums and such, just to have something forced onto us? I have my site looking perfect ( in my eyes) and am not happy with SM (or any other company) forcing a change on me. Far as I'm concerned, that could very well force me to cancel my account and look elsewhere.
Don't force anything on us. (not everyone likes the new photobar for example:sometimes I like it, a lot of times I prefer the old way)
I've seen my fair share of SM sites - some are incredibly awesome, and others (IMO) are just terrible - but the owner of those sites love the way they have them set up. Isn't that the point? If SM didn't allow customisation - every one of the sites on SM would be (forced?) using one template, no CSS customisatio, no navbars, no recent galleries, no slideshow - all things that (custom stuff) that brought me here.
I am all for the XL photos. But don't force me into a theme that I don't want in the first place in order for me to access the XL's. If that's the case, them I'm not interested in XL's. Too bad though - the Large are too small IMO where as the original may be waaay too big.
I still would like the choice of changing the amount of thumbnails from 15 to 9 or 12 but I can't seem to get that but will be forced to a theme just to get XL? People still want to get the recent gallery to show the newest photos first, but we can't get that...?
Pretty frusterating not being able to get a customization that a lot of people are asking for (and perhapse are giving up on) but then I read that you (Not SM) think it's a great idea to force people into a theme just to get a XL.
If you force someone that are using themes to a different theme just to make things easier for you (SM), you will seriously tick a lot of people off. Is that really worth it just to bring out something that maybe not everyone is really hoping to get (XL's)?
People seem to come to SM for two reasons that I've seen: simplicity, and customization.
Some (like myself at first) love the simplicity of SM and how awesome of a site we can get with zero coding required. Of course I've added some custom things (drop down nav bar, the recent gallery, the slideshow...but I still need further customizations like changing the amount of thumbs on a page from 15 to 9/12 for an example and I realize that maybe getting the recent gallery to show the thumbs newest to oldest intead of the oldest to the newest might be difficult or maybe even impossible but a lot of us want that).
I've seen some great customized SM sites out there. But being forced to a new (default) theme could cause more frusteration for your customers than it's worth just to bring a XL photo option. Wether or not we are running a business from our site. For a lot of us, our site represents US.
Imaging buying some land, building a home to exactly how you want it, just to have the city come in and tell you after you'ved moved in that you must paint it a certain colour, you couldn't have that hedge, you can't have that colour of carpet, you must get rid of that garage/workshop, and you can only have 'X' amount of bedrooms because they are going to pave everyones driveway 'as a new feature'.
I do agree that some of those themes are, well, embarrassing. And that some new ones are needed. But I like how my site looks now and will not want it changed by force.
Just my 2¢, or maybe that's more like 25¢ by now...
I like the way my site looks now except for the things I've mentioned (changing the amount of thumbs from 15 to 9 or 12, the recent gallery showing newer posts first). Don't force me into a different theme.
Again - just my 2¢. Hope I didn't overstep myself or speak out of turn or if I didn't make any sense since I got to sleep late, and woke up just a wee bit ago.
Are we waiting on Themes to be modified before we can have XL pics?? Is that true? I don't even use themes...
We never said that
no, it's been SmugIslands (dude, that was for YOU!!!!!! ), and now some other cool stuff we're working on. SmugMungous will come in time - it's still a priority but we've got work to do on the site for it still.
First off, please speak for yourself and not all of us using SM.
Obviously this is all I can do... I am only one person with one SmugMug account, using it in the way that I feel best... My main point had nothing to do with POWER or PRO users, I'm not one and don't see myself becoming one in the near future... I don't know how those other accounts work... I can only speak as a STANDARD user - the type of user that I feel is generally under-represented here on these forums... Most of your reactions / fears can be dismissed, just be re-reading my post with that context in mind... That, and I don't work for SmugMug, so my views carry no more weight than yours, or perhaps even less as I pay a lot less than you do...
I too do not like being forced... But I realise that sometimes concessions need to be made if SmugMug are to make improvements to their / our site... Just like the last step-change - things changed... We were 'forced' into this change - not without consultation and interaction mind, but nevertheless forced - however, with this change came a lot of improvements... Not everything we all wanted got included, some of the things I loved about the site got lost or buried away... But I wouldn't go back if I had the choice 'cos overall it's a great improvement...
As an end user, we should not be afraid of this 'forcing'... Anyone who's spent more than a few moments on this board would know how the SmugMug team operates and give them the trust they deserve... If companies did not force well-considered improvements, there would be no well-considered improvements and many disgruntled users... So let's continue to make our cases, but we need to trust them to see it in context of the bigger picture - which individual users can't see!
One man's criminal design faux pas is another man's god given right to have his site how he wants it.
As a STANDARD user, having to chose from a bunch of themes is hardly a 'god given right', nor necessarily the way 'he wants it' - regardless of the quality of said themes... I think we're talking about two different things here: Themes and customisation
oh and btw, anyone who thinks that SmugMug's themes are criminally bad hasn't been to myspace in a while. Or ever.
You jest... What has MySpace got in common with SmugMug? MySpace is a free service with millions of accounts... The abomination you see is not MySpace's fault, but the users... Customisation is allowed... However, because of this freedom, MySpace has to think VERY carefully about adding or enhancing any features without breaking millions of customised user pages... Which is why very little change has happened over the last few years... So who gets the advantage here? If they break something, however minor, it'll give any slightly disgruntled users even more reason to look around for alternatives... If they don't, competitors like Facebook (who don't have Themes only allow very limited / controlled customisation) will thrive - and are... MySpace is on it's way out, but that's OT!
It's a conundrum: To allow customisation AND to expediate improvements... How can we / SmugMug achieve both? I'll leave that question for people who know better... It's a technical and architectural minefield!
no, it's been SmugIslands (dude, that was for YOU!!!!!! ), and now some other cool stuff we're working on. SmugMungous will come in time - it's still a priority but we've got work to do on the site for it still.
I do appreciate you creating SmugIslands for me, really!
I set my site to be an Island, but haven't had a chance to really test it out.. But I do believe you will have many customers using it and you will be glad you have that offering now!
I too do not like being forced... But I realise that sometimes concessions need to be made if SmugMug are to make improvements to their / our site... Just like the last step-change - things changed... We were 'forced' into this change - not without consultation and interaction mind, but nevertheless forced - however, with this change came a lot of improvements... Not everything we all wanted got included, some of the things I loved about the site got lost or buried away... But I wouldn't go back if I had the choice 'cos overall it's a great improvement...
You should really search dgrin about changes (for the better) that have been forced upon SmugMug users. Search for threads about the lightbox. I really don't think I've seen people as mad about something as they were. I think you're underestimating just how po'd people would be if SmugMug took your advice.
As an end user, we should not be afraid of this 'forcing'... Anyone who's spent more than a few moments on this board would know how the SmugMug team operates and give them the trust they deserve... If companies did not force well-considered improvements, there would be no well-considered improvements and many disgruntled users... So let's continue to make our cases, but we need to trust them to see it in context of the bigger picture - which individual users can't see!
As I mentioned, incremental changes have been made. However, just dumping themes that (literally) thousands of people are using because they wouldn't go in anyone's graphic design portfolio isn't a smart decision (IMHO). But it could be that I just don't want to deal with it, I'm one of the guys that answers help desk emails (and who designed some of the themes that you probably hate ).
As a STANDARD user, having to chose from a bunch of themes is hardly a 'god given right',
Sorry, but you don't really have a realistic feel for how people would react.
nor necessarily the way 'he wants it' - regardless of the quality of said themes... I think we're talking about two different things here: Themes and customisation
Not really. For one, most people don't just choose a theme willy nilly on here. We get tons of emails that say "I hated every theme but xxxxx" where xxxxx is any one of the themes depending on who wrote the email. Then there are the people that are using the themes as the basis for their customizations. That's a whole other can of worms.
You jest... What has MySpace got in common with SmugMug?
I do not jest. People who do not know web design pay someone to "theme" their site for them (which with the themes, is now a service that SmugMug provides essentially). It's an obvious parallel dispite the differences in the services.
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
Comments
Jfriend: I think we'll start generating the XL sizes soon so we'll have them available for recent galleries when the themes are ready.
It seems one thing we need is a way for people go to to past galleries and generate these sizes. People with hundreds of galleries aren't going to want to do this one at a time, and it isn't clear right now what you'd do to trigger it.
As for how fast we can get past galleries done, I don't think we have enough metrics yet to know. When we did custom watermarks, the rush to go back to old galleries and re-do watermarks created an enormous server load for a long time.
Thanks,
Chris
Oh ya... he needs some other info for Smugbrowser to work w/ custom watermarks (an api method to retrieve the list of watermarks) was his statement...
Have a nice day...
It seems that there are many gallery-level functionalities which people would like to be able to change for more than one gallery at a time. Not to add to your workload, but maybe this is the perfect time to introduce an interface for multi-gallery changes. The "upsize to gigantor" button could be one of many features here.
Swim for Them | WellmanHouse.net | AlbumFetcher | SmugShowBuilder
how we goin here?
i'd like to offer people 1000-1200px size images to use as wallpaper, not really interested in going any larger at the moment.
i know you can set the digital download up and i've done that for quite cheap, however it's still an effort that my users wouldn't bother going to, but i'd like them to enjoy my pics on their desktop without feeling like i'm seeing them as revenue. :cry
anyhoo, this response is half just to subscribe to the topic...
Go with 1280 so I can haveit fit perfectly on my laptop
What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Just for the heck of it, I tried taking a photo URL I was working with:
http://nimai.smugmug.com/photos/103616369-L.jpg
And changing the -L to a -XL...
In Firefox, I get
At first I was hoping that if I directly accessed a -XL it would generate a nice, cleanly reduced file. (-1024x1024 looked kinda jpeg-ey, if you know what I mean.)
Anyway, what's with the -XL behavior? Just curious!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
From my point of view, if I'm understanding you correctly, that's a bit problematic. I'm an amateur photographer - I don't sell my prints or expect to make money off of them, so I'm all for showing people an XL size. But I also think it's important that only I have the original unless I want to share it with people. So on my account, I have LARGE turned on but ORIGINAL turned off. That would seem to mean that I won't get the option for XL...is that correct? If so, that's not a great solution for me, and I would suspect, many others. There's a big difference between offering someone an XL size image (what, 1280 wide?) and the original 12 megapixel image. I don't see why the two should be linked.
Jason Dunn
http://photos.jasondunn.com
The Photos: photos.jasondunn.com
The Blog: www.jasondunn.com
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
I think that's perfectly reasonable as a first step - if I understand correctly, in order to get the XL size on a gallery I'd need to add one new dummy image to that gallery, then it would generate the XL size of all images in the gallery. Then I could delete the dummy image I just uploaded and my gallery would be back to normal, just in XL size.
I personally don't have that many galleries uploaded so this wouldn't take me very long. In fact, I suspect no more than 30 seconds total per gallery, so even for someone with quite a few galleries this wouldn't be too bad. Sure, not as ideal as you guys doing it all server side, but I think any rational person understands the problem you're facing.
The Photos: photos.jasondunn.com
The Blog: www.jasondunn.com
The Photos: photos.jasondunn.com
The Blog: www.jasondunn.com
Aha, ok, so XL turned off by default but I can turn it on if I want to. Using Smugbrowser to do it account-wide will make that easy. Awesome!
The Photos: photos.jasondunn.com
The Blog: www.jasondunn.com
I would recommend spending some time on a couple new themes (maximum 5) instead, and get them to work with the new sizes... Force everyone using themes into a default new theme (the most elegant / non-offensive / one you think works best) and then they're left with a choice of 4 other themes to choose from if they object... You can then start adding more themes at a later date if you insist... But having fewer themes allows you to be more flexible in the future when you face cross-roads like this one!
I know forcing people into a theme isn't the kindest way of doing things, but if people are that concerned they should be using customised CSS anyway... Most using the themes are likely to be standard users (like myself) and won't be terribly bothered as long as it's not 'criminal'... Standard users are probably not trying to run a business through SmugMug, so branding issues are much less important... However, standard users still like to feel good about themselves / their site...
The amount of themes you currently offer may be impressive, but unfortunately the quality of said themes is not... Rather drastically reduce the number of themes and make sure that the few themes you offer are of excellent quality!
85mm f/1.8, 17-50 + 28-75m f/2.8 lenses
iMac 24" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Extreme, 4Gb RAM, OSX 10.5.7
http://encosion.com/ | http://encosion.smugmug.com/
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
First off, please speak for yourself and not all of us using SM. I do NOT like being forced into anything. A person or company who forces me to do something looses my business.
We spend a lot of time adjusting our sites to suit our needs/wants - just to have someone force a theme onto us? Not all of us (including myself) are CSS or coding gurus. Again, I spend all that time to customise my site to have something forced on to me? Uh uh - ain't gunna happen.
Branding issues are much less important? Seriously - I really must be missing something (granted I just crawled out of bed so may not be thinking straight) - but as I've already mentioned we spend a lot of time creating our perfect site with a lot of help from the forums and such, just to have something forced onto us? I have my site looking perfect ( in my eyes) and am not happy with SM (or any other company) forcing a change on me. Far as I'm concerned, that could very well force me to cancel my account and look elsewhere.
Don't force anything on us. (not everyone likes the new photobar for example:sometimes I like it, a lot of times I prefer the old way)
I've seen my fair share of SM sites - some are incredibly awesome, and others (IMO) are just terrible - but the owner of those sites love the way they have them set up. Isn't that the point? If SM didn't allow customisation - every one of the sites on SM would be (forced?) using one template, no CSS customisatio, no navbars, no recent galleries, no slideshow - all things that (custom stuff) that brought me here.
I am all for the XL photos. But don't force me into a theme that I don't want in the first place in order for me to access the XL's. If that's the case, them I'm not interested in XL's. Too bad though - the Large are too small IMO where as the original may be waaay too big.
I still would like the choice of changing the amount of thumbnails from 15 to 9 or 12 but I can't seem to get that but will be forced to a theme just to get XL? People still want to get the recent gallery to show the newest photos first, but we can't get that...?
Pretty frusterating not being able to get a customization that a lot of people are asking for (and perhapse are giving up on) but then I read that you (Not SM) think it's a great idea to force people into a theme just to get a XL.
If you force someone that are using themes to a different theme just to make things easier for you (SM), you will seriously tick a lot of people off. Is that really worth it just to bring out something that maybe not everyone is really hoping to get (XL's)?
People seem to come to SM for two reasons that I've seen: simplicity, and customization.
Some (like myself at first) love the simplicity of SM and how awesome of a site we can get with zero coding required. Of course I've added some custom things (drop down nav bar, the recent gallery, the slideshow...but I still need further customizations like changing the amount of thumbs on a page from 15 to 9/12 for an example and I realize that maybe getting the recent gallery to show the thumbs newest to oldest intead of the oldest to the newest might be difficult or maybe even impossible but a lot of us want that).
I've seen some great customized SM sites out there. But being forced to a new (default) theme could cause more frusteration for your customers than it's worth just to bring a XL photo option. Wether or not we are running a business from our site. For a lot of us, our site represents US.
Imaging buying some land, building a home to exactly how you want it, just to have the city come in and tell you after you'ved moved in that you must paint it a certain colour, you couldn't have that hedge, you can't have that colour of carpet, you must get rid of that garage/workshop, and you can only have 'X' amount of bedrooms because they are going to pave everyones driveway 'as a new feature'.
I do agree that some of those themes are, well, embarrassing. And that some new ones are needed. But I like how my site looks now and will not want it changed by force.
Just my 2¢, or maybe that's more like 25¢ by now...
Again - just my 2¢. Hope I didn't overstep myself or speak out of turn or if I didn't make any sense since I got to sleep late, and woke up just a wee bit ago.
What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."
oh and btw, anyone who thinks that SmugMug's themes are criminally bad hasn't been to myspace in a while. Or ever.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
btw, did you catch the subliminal message contained in this post, can you see it?
no, it's been SmugIslands (dude, that was for YOU!!!!!!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."
Thats good
I love my site the way it is (except for a few minor aformentioned tidbits).
What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."
I too do not like being forced... But I realise that sometimes concessions need to be made if SmugMug are to make improvements to their / our site... Just like the last step-change - things changed... We were 'forced' into this change - not without consultation and interaction mind, but nevertheless forced - however, with this change came a lot of improvements... Not everything we all wanted got included, some of the things I loved about the site got lost or buried away... But I wouldn't go back if I had the choice 'cos overall it's a great improvement...
As an end user, we should not be afraid of this 'forcing'... Anyone who's spent more than a few moments on this board would know how the SmugMug team operates and give them the trust they deserve... If companies did not force well-considered improvements, there would be no well-considered improvements and many disgruntled users... So let's continue to make our cases, but we need to trust them to see it in context of the bigger picture - which individual users can't see!
I'm no know-it-all, I could be wrong...
As a STANDARD user, having to chose from a bunch of themes is hardly a 'god given right', nor necessarily the way 'he wants it' - regardless of the quality of said themes... I think we're talking about two different things here: Themes and customisation
You jest... What has MySpace got in common with SmugMug? MySpace is a free service with millions of accounts... The abomination you see is not MySpace's fault, but the users... Customisation is allowed... However, because of this freedom, MySpace has to think VERY carefully about adding or enhancing any features without breaking millions of customised user pages... Which is why very little change has happened over the last few years... So who gets the advantage here? If they break something, however minor, it'll give any slightly disgruntled users even more reason to look around for alternatives... If they don't, competitors like Facebook (who don't have Themes only allow very limited / controlled customisation) will thrive - and are... MySpace is on it's way out, but that's OT!
It's a conundrum: To allow customisation AND to expediate improvements... How can we / SmugMug achieve both? I'll leave that question for people who know better... It's a technical and architectural minefield!
85mm f/1.8, 17-50 + 28-75m f/2.8 lenses
iMac 24" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Extreme, 4Gb RAM, OSX 10.5.7
http://encosion.com/ | http://encosion.smugmug.com/
I do appreciate you creating SmugIslands for me, really!
I set my site to be an Island, but haven't had a chance to really test it out.. But I do believe you will have many customers using it and you will be glad you have that offering now!
Thanks Smugmug!
As I mentioned, incremental changes have been made. However, just dumping themes that (literally) thousands of people are using because they wouldn't go in anyone's graphic design portfolio isn't a smart decision (IMHO). But it could be that I just don't want to deal with it, I'm one of the guys that answers help desk emails (and who designed some of the themes that you probably hate
Sorry, but you don't really have a realistic feel for how people would react. Not really. For one, most people don't just choose a theme willy nilly on here. We get tons of emails that say "I hated every theme but xxxxx" where xxxxx is any one of the themes depending on who wrote the email. Then there are the people that are using the themes as the basis for their customizations. That's a whole other can of worms.
I do not jest. People who do not know web design pay someone to "theme" their site for them (which with the themes, is now a service that SmugMug provides essentially). It's an obvious parallel dispite the differences in the services.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
http://tristan.smugmug.com/gallery/2813026#158695397
you notice that there is quite a bit of space wasted on the sides of the browser window. Contrast this with a sample Zenfolio gallery:
http://brianrickey.zenfolio.com/p348...B140#784469580
and you can see that they are much better suited to photos (esp. horizontals) and better space efficiency/design.