Let me get this straight. The 3x/Original is only for freshly uploaded files, correct? And as long as I upload 800px. or so, Origianl is still "actual" dimensions, correct?
Personally, I like the idea of larger sizes, but limiting the functionality for me (a longtime standard user) pretty much sucks. Sneeking this under the radar is not cool. I'm going to have to at least consider other options before staying with you.
You guys have been great, but this is a piss poor implementation of what could be a great feature.
I currently have a power account and upload photos with the maximum size of 1024 pixels wide and 768 pixels high. I do this to limit what others can do with my photos as everyone has access to save my pictures.
If in the future I decided that I wanted to try and sell my pictures and uploaded original size photos I would have a big problem with viewers being able to access the larger sizes of XL2 and XL3. At some point I would probably upgrade to a pro account but in the interim it would be a problem.
There is no doubt that no matter what you do to protect your pictures people are going to use them without your permission but I want to make this as difficult as possilbe for people to do even if I'm not selling my pictures.
I also believe that the trend for bigger and bigger monitors is going to slow down and eventually the standard for most people will be a 22" or 24" widescreen monitor. I just don't think it is practical for most people to have anything larger than a 24" monitor. Also in my personal opinion viewing and image at 1024 wide is large enough that the viewer can have a plesant viewing experinece. It may not fill the entire screen of a 24" monitor but you can still get a good view of the picture.
You are seriously compromising your viewers experience by limiting them to smaller images if you restrict galleries to Large size only.
And that is my choice as the owner of those photos. Why do you care anyway? As a pro user, I don't see how you have a dog in this fight.
In a short while, Smugmug will probably have the new flash-based slideshows working for regular gallery slideshow views and boy that will be spectacular when it can use the new large sizes on a big screen. Do you really want to deprive all that from your viewers?
Then I can turn it back on if I want to. Its not like once that flag is set, it is set permanently. For now, such a display doesn't exist. At some point it might and it might make more sense to take advantage of it.
If you're not a pro and aren't making money from your images, what is to you if someone borrows an image occasionally? I know it feels weird and you wish it wasn't happening.
Because it is against the law? Because it violates my rights as a content creator? Because just because I let you view it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it, and it is not wrong of me to do what I want to try and stop you.
I don't mean to sound so hostile, but you are in this thread campaigning against people that are asking smugmug for a reasonable amount of control over their users viewing experience, and such a change would not even effect you. If you don't want to view things at smaller than large size, then leave those sites when you come across them, the same way i leave sites that make music or disable browser functionality.
If you wouldn't mind, and are reading this thread, would you mind letting me know two things:
- Is this important to you?
- Do you have a Standard or Power level account (or if you're thinking about signing up, what level you're eyeing)?
Thanks!
I am a long time Smugmug customer and this entire situation really unnerves me. I have a power level account and although I do some professional work it's not enough to justify having a Pro account.
I upload all of my images to my SmugMug site for two reasons.
If I am not at home I can still access the orignal images if I need them for any reason
They are backed up and protected from loss due to my own home PC failing.
The ability to protect my images from theft or unwanted printing is extremely important to me. However, I don't like to password protect everything as it makes the site look uninteresting. The ability to restrict image sizes to no more than the traditional "large" worked perfect for me.
This whole situation is very disheartening to me and I really cannot upload any more images until the ability to restrict down to "large" is restored. That being the said, if it is not restored I cannot continue to maintain an account with SmugMug.
And that is my choice as the owner of those photos. Why do you care anyway? As a pro user, I don't see how you have a dog in this fight.
I've said that if you want this, you should ask for it. I wrote that message because I just wanted to make sure everyone was making an informed decision and understood that this is a tradeoff. If you want to prevent piracy of larger sizes, then you have to deny your viewers access to those larger sizes in their web experience or use pro-watermarking. That is your choice. I don't care what you choose (unless I wanted to be one of your viewers). I just wasn't sure that everyone asking for this understood what they were giving up by limiting the web viewing size. If you do understand and still want to do it, then go for it.
I am a long time Smugmug customer and this entire situation really unnerves me. I have a power level account and although I do some professional work it's not enough to justify having a Pro account.
I upload all of my images to my SmugMug site for two reasons.
If I am not at home I can still access the orignal images if I need them for any reason
They are backed up and protected from loss due to my own home PC failing.
The ability to protect my images from theft or unwanted printing is extremely important to me. However, I don't like to password protect everything as it makes the site look uninteresting. The ability to restrict image sizes to no more than the traditional "large" worked perfect for me.
This whole situation is very disheartening to me and I really cannot upload any more images until the ability to restrict down to "large" is restored. That being the said, if it is not restored I cannot continue to maintain an account with SmugMug.
Thanks for your plain-talk - we wouldn't want it any other way.
We're discussing this internally and hope to come to a decision point soon.
personally I like the feature, but I don't like it as a default. I use Star Explorer to upload presently due to the massive amount of photos I need to post. As it stands I already have more then my fair share of people stealing photos off my site (yes I have protection and watermarking turned on and people are still taking the PROOF's). With the smaller proof and the larger sizes availalble I'm not as happy. I am having to go through and manually alter the size options to "large" instead of everything under "Original"
If you wouldn't mind, and are reading this thread, would you mind letting me know two things:
- Is this important to you?
- Do you have a Standard or Power level account (or if you're thinking about signing up, what level you're eyeing)?
Hello onethumb,
I'm responding here in part because it looks like this thread is getting a lot of views and not really so many responses , and also because I have a slightly different view ?
I have a pro account which gives me all I could wish for (except for £ sterling shopping cart), and a power level which I use for 'other' purposes.
I have no doubt that if I currently had just the power level account only, I would wish to exercise some more control over the image sizes, and also I generally echo the sentiments of Renstar's post above re unauthorized usage.
However, if I was a potential new customer, and could actually find my way around all of this prior to signing up at all, then I would go for the Pro level account because of the protection and control it would give me.
I truly believe that SmugMug offers exceptional value for money, and considering the amount of $$$$ spent on equipment $150 a year is peanuts to protect those precious images.
(I have a long-standing gripe with anyone who "borrows" my images without the courtesy of a request - I just love to give them to those who ask almost as much as selling them.)
Rebuild needed for larger custom rendering?
I use custom rendering to generate images for display in another web site. I have originals turned off, so any custom image larger than 800x600 (900x750 would be ideal for me) would be blurry because it was upsized from the Large image, I think.
If I now enable XL sizes, will the custom rendering engine generate larger-than-large sizes cleanly from the original? Or do I have to do one of the regeneration tricks so that it can generate the larger size from the XL images?
(I tried just testing it, but I'm having trouble judging what I'm seeing.)
- Is this important to you?
- Do you have a Standard or Power level account (or if you're thinking about signing up, what level you're eyeing)?
Hi! I am new to smugmug, but already upped over 5k pictures. I thought its great that I can upload my original size for backup and to have them handy, but restrict viewing to L. I was shocked to see this function gone and I think I will stop uploading anymore pictures till this is sorted out.
I think Standard Users should at least be able to choose between the former L and X3L as biggest viewing size. I would go for a Power account if I could then chosse all sizes, since I would like XL as biggest viewing size for some galleries.
Going Pro just to get back the restriction to L is not an option for me.
I use custom rendering to generate images for display in another web site. I have originals turned off, so any custom image larger than 800x600 (900x750 would be ideal for me) would be blurry because it was upsized from the Large image, I think.
If I now enable XL sizes, will the custom rendering engine generate larger-than-large sizes cleanly from the original? Or do I have to do one of the regeneration tricks so that it can generate the larger size from the XL images?
(I tried just testing it, but I'm having trouble judging what I'm seeing.)
Pro account, if that makes a difference.
I believe that we custom render from the largest size you have allowed. So if you allow XL, we'll custom render from that.
Basically, we don't want people to be able to get more quality pixels than you allow them. If you limit them to 800 pixel images (larges) we don't want them to be able to manipulate the url and get larger sizes.
Make sense? I'd have to look into it further to double-check, but I think that's how we do it!
Hover text for image sizes
I would like to make another request to have some hover text on the page in discussion that specifies what size the image actually is. For instance, if you put the mouse on the "Copy Link" box you get a status message or hover text of "600x400" or whatever. I use a D70 and a T-10, which means sometimes Medium is 600x400 and sometimes 600x450. Right now I have to click through, right click for "Properties" to get the size so that I can embed the link correctly.
I'm trying to double rotate a few of my galleries to get the new sizes generated, but the rotate operation is consistently leaving out some of the photos. For example, on the rotate page, I select all of the images in a gallery of 50 photos and 6 or 7 will not rotate. Is this a known issue? Is there a workaround? Thanks.
I'm trying to double rotate a few of my galleries to get the new sizes generated, but the rotate operation is consistently leaving out some of the photos. For example, on the rotate page, I select all of the images in a gallery of 50 photos and 6 or 7 will not rotate. Is this a known issue? Is there a workaround? Thanks.
I'm trying to double rotate a few of my galleries to get the new sizes generated, but the rotate operation is consistently leaving out some of the photos. For example, on the rotate page, I select all of the images in a gallery of 50 photos and 6 or 7 will not rotate. Is this a known issue? Is there a workaround? Thanks.
Out of curiousity, were you applying a rotation and then applying another rotation soon afterwards? Our servers don't like that, and will often skip the second rotation.
I also believe that the trend for bigger and bigger monitors is going to slow down and eventually the standard for most people will be a 22" or 24" widescreen monitor. I just don't think it is practical for most people to have anything larger than a 24" monitor. Also in my personal opinion viewing and image at 1024 wide is large enough that the viewer can have a plesant viewing experinece. It may not fill the entire screen of a 24" monitor but you can still get a good view of the picture.
Just my .02 cents.
Ture, but the trend to higher resolutions will continue once that trend has stopped. In a few years those 24" screens will likely have 200+ pixels per inch resolution. Meaning that 1024 pixel wide image you feel is "large enough" will be ~5" across. Higher and higher resolution displays show up every quarter. The flat panel I'm typing this on has higher resolution than the first color printer I bought back in the late 80s. There are already displays in the wild with 150+ ppi. Readily available displays at 133 ppi are easy to come by.
SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
something I noticed today. I changed a gallery from "Protected" and "Large" to "Not Protected" and "Original" and the new XL sizes do not show up as options. This is a new gallery however though that did originally have the XL options
something I noticed today. I changed a gallery from "Protected" and "Large" to "Not Protected" and "Original" and the new XL sizes do not show up as options. This is a new gallery however though that did originally have the XL options
The new size options will not show in the lightbox unless that photo has been
regenerated for new sizes.
I believe that we custom render from the largest size you have allowed. So if you allow XL, we'll custom render from that.
That's my understanding as well. However, I'm wondering what happens when I allow XL on a gallery with images that were uploaded before XL sizes were possible. Those images don't have XL versions, just L and O. So if I request a custom rendering that is larger than L but smaller than XL, will it up-res the L image (which will be blurry) or down-res the O image.
That is, when originals are off, is custom rendering limited by the largest allowed size or the largest existing size?
That's my understanding as well. However, I'm wondering what happens when I allow XL on a gallery with images that were uploaded before XL sizes were possible. Those images don't have XL versions, just L and O. So if I request a custom rendering that is larger than L but smaller than XL, will it up-res the L image (which will be blurry) or down-res the O image.
That is, when originals are off, is custom rendering limited by the largest allowed size or the largest existing size?
Here's a request for an x3 image of one that was uploaded ages ago......
Yep, so even if you allow people to view images up to X2L, for example... we have to actually generate XL and X2L sizes for your images before they'll be used for custom rendering.
When i saw the new options, I almost wanted to cry (joyful tears)!!!
One thing though, a lot of people are gonna be 'rotating' the photos to get the new sizes... why not just add an 'regenerate image sizes' function and maybe give it a 'low' priority on your servers?
It will be nice to have a function to regenerate image sizes on the ENTIRE account!!! I am a PRO user with over 61k photos.....
I'm trying to double rotate a few of my galleries to get the new sizes generated, but the rotate operation is consistently leaving out some of the photos. For example, on the rotate page, I select all of the images in a gallery of 50 photos and 6 or 7 will not rotate. Is this a known issue? Is there a workaround? Thanks.
I've been getting the same issue. A couple of the photos were stuck in the rotation "processing" state for a long time, and then simply timed out.
I found that 'crop' worked much better. I simply selected the 'crop' function, and then choose save, without doing any crop. worked just fine and was faster than two rotations.
Yep, so even if you allow people to view images up to X2L, for example... we have to actually generate XL and X2L sizes for your images before they'll be used for custom rendering.
Thanks, I guess I'll have to add to your server load and re-gen a few galleries...
I found that 'crop' worked much better. I simply selected the 'crop' function, and then choose save, without doing any crop. worked just fine and was faster than two rotations.
That sounds like a good idea. I'll try it out this evening. However, I'm wondering if either cropping (without any crop) or double rotating the photos causes any loss in quality. If there is any degradation in quality, it may be better just to re-upload the images.
Hopefully SmugMug will add a 'regenerate' function soon and this will all become moot.
Thanks Andy. I've actually lost my credentials from before so I had to get a new login.
In the past, I've resized my photos before uploading because the Large was a tad too small, but I definitely didn't want the full size showing up for easy downloads. I've been wanting to be able to upload full size photos for archival and backup reasons just like the other users but didn't want to double upload. Now that you have the X-Large size, I'd love to be able to use that as the max viewable size and know that I have a backup that I can always get to from anywhere.
Just fyi, if it weren't for the great resizing algorithms that you chose to implement, this would all be a moot point anyways, so I just wanted to put that in as well.
Comments
Personally, I like the idea of larger sizes, but limiting the functionality for me (a longtime standard user) pretty much sucks. Sneeking this under the radar is not cool. I'm going to have to at least consider other options before staying with you.
You guys have been great, but this is a piss poor implementation of what could be a great feature.
~JF
If in the future I decided that I wanted to try and sell my pictures and uploaded original size photos I would have a big problem with viewers being able to access the larger sizes of XL2 and XL3. At some point I would probably upgrade to a pro account but in the interim it would be a problem.
There is no doubt that no matter what you do to protect your pictures people are going to use them without your permission but I want to make this as difficult as possilbe for people to do even if I'm not selling my pictures.
I also believe that the trend for bigger and bigger monitors is going to slow down and eventually the standard for most people will be a 22" or 24" widescreen monitor. I just don't think it is practical for most people to have anything larger than a 24" monitor. Also in my personal opinion viewing and image at 1024 wide is large enough that the viewer can have a plesant viewing experinece. It may not fill the entire screen of a 24" monitor but you can still get a good view of the picture.
Just my .02 cents.
Then I can turn it back on if I want to. Its not like once that flag is set, it is set permanently. For now, such a display doesn't exist. At some point it might and it might make more sense to take advantage of it.
Because it is against the law? Because it violates my rights as a content creator? Because just because I let you view it doesn't mean you can do whatever you want with it, and it is not wrong of me to do what I want to try and stop you.
I don't mean to sound so hostile, but you are in this thread campaigning against people that are asking smugmug for a reasonable amount of control over their users viewing experience, and such a change would not even effect you. If you don't want to view things at smaller than large size, then leave those sites when you come across them, the same way i leave sites that make music or disable browser functionality.
-r
I am a long time Smugmug customer and this entire situation really unnerves me. I have a power level account and although I do some professional work it's not enough to justify having a Pro account.
I upload all of my images to my SmugMug site for two reasons.
- If I am not at home I can still access the orignal images if I need them for any reason
- They are backed up and protected from loss due to my own home PC failing.
The ability to protect my images from theft or unwanted printing is extremely important to me. However, I don't like to password protect everything as it makes the site look uninteresting. The ability to restrict image sizes to no more than the traditional "large" worked perfect for me.This whole situation is very disheartening to me and I really cannot upload any more images until the ability to restrict down to "large" is restored. That being the said, if it is not restored I cannot continue to maintain an account with SmugMug.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
We're discussing this internally and hope to come to a decision point soon.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I'm a Power account user who would very much like to be able to still restrict back to something smaller than XL3.
Cheers
I'm responding here in part because it looks like this thread is getting a lot of views and not really so many responses
I have a pro account which gives me all I could wish for (except for £ sterling shopping cart), and a power level which I use for 'other' purposes.
I have no doubt that if I currently had just the power level account only, I would wish to exercise some more control over the image sizes, and also I generally echo the sentiments of Renstar's post above re unauthorized usage.
However, if I was a potential new customer, and could actually find my way around all of this prior to signing up at all, then I would go for the Pro level account because of the protection and control it would give me.
I truly believe that SmugMug offers exceptional value for money, and considering the amount of $$$$ spent on equipment $150 a year is peanuts to protect those precious images.
(I have a long-standing gripe with anyone who "borrows" my images without the courtesy of a request - I just love to give them to those who ask almost as much as selling them.)
Caroline
smugmugmonday.blogspot,com
www.carolineshipsey.co.uk - Follow me on G+
[/URL]
I use custom rendering to generate images for display in another web site. I have originals turned off, so any custom image larger than 800x600 (900x750 would be ideal for me) would be blurry because it was upsized from the Large image, I think.
If I now enable XL sizes, will the custom rendering engine generate larger-than-large sizes cleanly from the original? Or do I have to do one of the regeneration tricks so that it can generate the larger size from the XL images?
(I tried just testing it, but I'm having trouble judging what I'm seeing.)
Pro account, if that makes a difference.
I think Standard Users should at least be able to choose between the former L and X3L as biggest viewing size. I would go for a Power account if I could then chosse all sizes, since I would like XL as biggest viewing size for some galleries.
Going Pro just to get back the restriction to L is not an option for me.
Kristof
I believe that we custom render from the largest size you have allowed. So if you allow XL, we'll custom render from that.
Basically, we don't want people to be able to get more quality pixels than you allow them. If you limit them to 800 pixel images (larges) we don't want them to be able to manipulate the url and get larger sizes.
Make sense? I'd have to look into it further to double-check, but I think that's how we do it!
-Anne
I would like to make another request to have some hover text on the page in discussion that specifies what size the image actually is. For instance, if you put the mouse on the "Copy Link" box you get a status message or hover text of "600x400" or whatever. I use a D70 and a T-10, which means sometimes Medium is 600x400 and sometimes 600x450. Right now I have to click through, right click for "Properties" to get the size so that I can embed the link correctly.
- Do you have a Standard or Power level account (or if you're thinking about signing up, what level you're eyeing)?
this is important to me. i'm a standard account holder.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Out of curiousity, were you applying a rotation and then applying another rotation soon afterwards? Our servers don't like that, and will often skip the second rotation.
Ture, but the trend to higher resolutions will continue once that trend has stopped. In a few years those 24" screens will likely have 200+ pixels per inch resolution. Meaning that 1024 pixel wide image you feel is "large enough" will be ~5" across. Higher and higher resolution displays show up every quarter. The flat panel I'm typing this on has higher resolution than the first color printer I bought back in the late 80s. There are already displays in the wild with 150+ ppi. Readily available displays at 133 ppi are easy to come by.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
regenerated for new sizes.
My Website index | My Blog
That's my understanding as well. However, I'm wondering what happens when I allow XL on a gallery with images that were uploaded before XL sizes were possible. Those images don't have XL versions, just L and O. So if I request a custom rendering that is larger than L but smaller than XL, will it up-res the L image (which will be blurry) or down-res the O image.
That is, when originals are off, is custom rendering limited by the largest allowed size or the largest existing size?
Here's a request for an x3 image of one that was uploaded ages ago......
http://ogle.smugmug.com/photos/191431427-X3.jpg
it shows the largest size that is already processed, Large.
Now this gallery is limited to XL size
this is what happens with a custom request res:
http://ogle.smugmug.com/photos/191431427-1000x1000.jpg
it looks like the large is uprezed
Yep, so even if you allow people to view images up to X2L, for example... we have to actually generate XL and X2L sizes for your images before they'll be used for custom rendering.
-Anne
One thing though, a lot of people are gonna be 'rotating' the photos to get the new sizes... why not just add an 'regenerate image sizes' function and maybe give it a 'low' priority on your servers?
It will be nice to have a function to regenerate image sizes on the ENTIRE account!!! I am a PRO user with over 61k photos.....
I've been getting the same issue. A couple of the photos were stuck in the rotation "processing" state for a long time, and then simply timed out.
Thanks, I guess I'll have to add to your server load and re-gen a few galleries...
That sounds like a good idea. I'll try it out this evening. However, I'm wondering if either cropping (without any crop) or double rotating the photos causes any loss in quality. If there is any degradation in quality, it may be better just to re-upload the images.
Hopefully SmugMug will add a 'regenerate' function soon and this will all become moot.
Thanks.
In the past, I've resized my photos before uploading because the Large was a tad too small, but I definitely didn't want the full size showing up for easy downloads. I've been wanting to be able to upload full size photos for archival and backup reasons just like the other users but didn't want to double upload. Now that you have the X-Large size, I'd love to be able to use that as the max viewable size and know that I have a backup that I can always get to from anywhere.
Just fyi, if it weren't for the great resizing algorithms that you chose to implement, this would all be a moot point anyways, so I just wanted to put that in as well.