Double Rotation not working???
I just double-double rotated a gallery (double rotated once...discovered the new sizes did not take effect....so double-rotated AGAIN...still no luck) without success.
Logged-in, reset style to Viewer-Controlled (from forced Journal), and set "smugmug' style before rotating.
EDIT: SPOKE TOO SOON....I see "Xlarge" there now!, but not X2 X3....maybe it's in my Control Panel...gotta go check.
EDIT: OK...found it in the Customize Gallery page....All better now!
I just double-double rotated a gallery (double rotated once...discovered the new sizes did not take effect....so double-rotated AGAIN...still no luck) without success.
Yup, there's now a SmugMungous option in your photo tools.
I'd like to warn everyone that using the SmugMungous option in your photo tools will reset all of your thumbnails, without any possibility of recovery (other than manually re-creating each one).
Personally, I think that this "feature" has completely undone all the good credit that smugmug had, and I'm now seriously considering moving my photos elsewhere.
I'd like to warn everyone that using the SmugMungous option in your photo tools will reset all of your thumbnails, without any possibility of recovery (other than manually re-creating each one).
Personally, I think that this "feature" has completely undone all the good credit that smugmug had, and I'm now seriously considering moving my photos elsewhere.
:nono :nono :nono :nono
And my same response to you by email:
Hi Paul,
Ouch! I'm so so sorry that you feel this way The bulk zoom is available, to rezoom all of your thumbs.
ANY action like rotate, watermarking, and the new SmugMugnifying, will cause new display copies to be made. It's always been this way. Bulk zoom is available to re-zoom your thumbs, and you've used that hack, yes?
I'm sorry that you'd leave us over this. I hope you'll reconsider.
I'm sorrier even that you've begun deleting posts on dgrin as well, taking away information that you've freely given to the community in the past.
I'd like to warn everyone that using the SmugMungous option in your photo tools will reset all of your thumbnails, without any possibility of recovery (other than manually re-creating each one).
I will ask our Help Page Mistress to put a prominent note in our photo tools help about this. It's not new with SmugMungous! (Bulk) but any tool (watermark, rotate, etc)..
And for anyone (with a mac) that doesn't want to go through all of their galleries and do that by hand, there's an API using tool to do it for you. See this thread.
SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
...but even if we just were able to keep full metadata on the XL, XL2 and XL3 copies, that could be around 300Kb per image you upload to SmugMug.
I'm amazed the file sizes are that big with the metadata. I took an image I have locally, one with the metadata that I put in it (which includes the tag, comment, author, copyright, and all the EXIF data). The file is 2,974,665 bytes in size according to Vista. I then made a copy of the image and used Vista's "Remove Properties and Personal Information" function to strip out all the metadata...though strangely it left behind F-Stop, Exposure Time, Exposure bias, focal length, and Max aperature). The resulting file size after the strip? 2,975,374 bytes. Yeah, 0.7 bytes BIGGER without the metadata. I don't understand that at all.
Not that I don't believe you , but what sort of metadata was in those files? Are we talking lots of fat from a Lightroom/Aperature export? I'm just shocked the numbers are so huge!
Keep in mind, SmugMungous part II is to have the gallery be fluid, stretch, to fill your giant monitors with many thumbnails and a XL, or perhaps even larger, main image We want SmugMug to be really fast, for everyone.
That sounds SO good! ...as long as it happens after the completely sad home page options are improved. Right now my gallery home page looks like it was ripped from 2001 with it's wee little 100 x 67 pixel images and 54 characters worth of text per album.
The above is mitigated, if we could do what you suggest, keeping ONLY say the copyright notice, copyright status, and author fields, for example.
I think that would be a good start - pick a copy of commonly used fields and keep only that. I don't care if someone downloads my image and can't tell what kind of lens I was using, but I do care if they can't ever tell that it was me that took the picture.
Comments
I luv U!
This is what I call service, speed and collaboration!
Thanx a lot!
Nicolas
I just double-double rotated a gallery (double rotated once...discovered the new sizes did not take effect....so double-rotated AGAIN...still no luck) without success.
Logged-in, reset style to Viewer-Controlled (from forced Journal), and set "smugmug' style before rotating.
EDIT: SPOKE TOO SOON....I see "Xlarge" there now!, but not X2 X3....maybe it's in my Control Panel...gotta go check.
EDIT: OK...found it in the Customize Gallery page....All better now!
release notes: http://blogs.smugmug.com/release-notes/
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
One question: How do I access the Original if I'm the gallery owner without changing the permissions to allow Originals?
Thanks!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Thanks anyways Andy!
Personally, I think that this "feature" has completely undone all the good credit that smugmug had, and I'm now seriously considering moving my photos elsewhere.
:nono :nono :nono :nono
And my same response to you by email:
Hi Paul,
Ouch! I'm so so sorry that you feel this way
ANY action like rotate, watermarking, and the new SmugMugnifying, will cause new display copies to be made. It's always been this way. Bulk zoom is available to re-zoom your thumbs, and you've used that hack, yes?
I'm sorry that you'd leave us over this. I hope you'll reconsider.
I'm sorrier even that you've begun deleting posts on dgrin as well, taking away information that you've freely given to the community in the past.
Andy
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
And for anyone (with a mac) that doesn't want to go through all of their galleries and do that by hand, there's an API using tool to do it for you. See this thread.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
I'm amazed the file sizes are that big with the metadata. I took an image I have locally, one with the metadata that I put in it (which includes the tag, comment, author, copyright, and all the EXIF data). The file is 2,974,665 bytes in size according to Vista. I then made a copy of the image and used Vista's "Remove Properties and Personal Information" function to strip out all the metadata...though strangely it left behind F-Stop, Exposure Time, Exposure bias, focal length, and Max aperature). The resulting file size after the strip? 2,975,374 bytes. Yeah, 0.7 bytes BIGGER without the metadata. I don't understand that at all.
Not that I don't believe you
That sounds SO good!
I think that would be a good start - pick a copy of commonly used fields and keep only that. I don't care if someone downloads my image and can't tell what kind of lens I was using, but I do care if they can't ever tell that it was me that took the picture.
The Photos: photos.jasondunn.com
The Blog: www.jasondunn.com
Hey, it looks like you fixed it! I didn't even notice it in the release notes.
Thanks!