Allen's right; if you add a password to the galleries, they only have to enter it once (for all galleries) and it will stay on their computer in the form of a cookie for a week or so. Not too much of a challenge.
You can password protect them from quicksettings AND you can bulk password them in SmugBrowser.
Come on stuart, this statement is a little overboard. We're trying to help you here, but taking things to this level is a bit far. The default behavior for a public gallery is that:
it's listed in your home page and thus browsable by anyone
it's available in smugmug search
it's available in search engine search
it's available on "popular photos"
it's available in category specific browsing from the smugmug top level
it's available in the mobile interface
it's available in keyword search without logging in to that account
it's available in a public RSS feed
it's available in the public Smugmug API without logging in to that account
That's a public gallery. Plain and simple.
The default for an unlisted gallery is exactly the opposite. None of the above are true.
But most of those public gallery default behaviours can be changed (turned off), either through control panel customization (disable searching, ratings, etc), intentional behaviour (not assigning keywords) or "hacks".
Only the delivery mechanisms (API, mobile interface and RSS) are without recourse for the owner to change.
I'm wondering, for example, what if you could have an unlisted category. It would never show in the home page or any public APIs or browsers.
A hidden category (and subcategory too) option would be great, as long as items underneath could be "public but hidden from above" so as to allow for easy navigation once "inside".
You would have to be sure the various interfaces respected the hidden category "global" setting. The iphone interface ignores category and subcategory completely, you are simply presented with dozens of pages of galleries. The RSS feed (IIRC) goes even further and just shows individual images.
So basically the only way to completely protect our images is by watermarking all of them? I just used the iphone browser and browsed all my images and was able to see the large ones too, yikes!
You can see the large ones in a regular browser, as well. iPhone browser respects the image sizes you set in the gallery.
JFriend, the point I was trying to make is that, for many people, 'public' galleries are not really any less 'secure' than unlisted.
If you are trying to sell your images and you promote your homepage then yes, there is a big difference. But I (and many others I suspect) have differnet needs from Smugmug and do not need to publicise my homepage. I use an obscure user name and dont give you the url and you would never find my 'public' galleries. All that stuff on your list is great for folks selling pics but I neither need nor use any of it. I appreciate that a lot of 'pros' frequent this forum but I suspect that the vast majority of Smugmug users dont sell anything and just need family, friends and maybe a small group of business contacts to have access to their pics.
I cannot see why anyone would have any objection to us being given the option somehow to opt out of the iphone interface or control it in someway. There have been some great suggestions made in this thread . . lets hope one of them gets taken up.
As an example . . the moonriver site shows 10 galleries on the 'official' homepage . . . but I see 33 'public' galleries by adding 'iphone' http://www.moonriverphotography.com/iphone I dont see what right-click protection will do . . . a simple press of the print screen button gets any image.
To keep your client galleries from being discovered or seen by iPhone, add the same password to all the client galleries . .
Allen (and DrDavid), I do not want my client's looking at rows of padlocks just to avoid this iphone issue. It is neither an attractive nor an elegant solution. A simpler solution is to have the iphone page 'ignore' images with external links turned off. Why would anyone possibly have an objection to that?
Allen (and DrDavid), I do not want my client's looking at rows of padlocks just to avoid this iphone issue. It is neither an attractive nor an elegant solution. A simpler solution is to have the iphone page 'ignore' images with external links turned off. Why would anyone possibly have an objection to that?
Rows of padlocks, just feature a photo in each gallery and you won't see them.
I feel we are veering way off track here. I am not looking for workarounds or alternative ways of doing things. I am happy with my Smugmug setup. The point of me starting this thread was to highlight and enlighten everyone to the fact that on one hand we have the regular Smugmug homepage which offers us LOTS of control over how our galleries are displayed . . . and on the other hand we have a parallel 'iphone' interface which gives is NO control over how our galleries are displayed.
It is simply an unacceptable (to me) inconsistancy. The iphone interface is a blunt tool and therefore undermines any controls you have put in place on the normal smugmug homepage. This is an indesputable statement of fact. It is not about 'security' its just about having equal control over both interfaces. If smugmug cannot provide this equality (say for technical reasons) then smugmug customers should be allowed to opt out of the inferior iphone interface until such times as they can work out how to do it.
Check the moonriver site as an example (links 3 posts above). Their regular smugmug homepage is carefully set up to show you 8 galleries . . but the iphone interface reveals 33 galleries, as they have no way to control the iphone display to make it match their normal homepage.
Check the moonriver site as an example. Their regular smugmug homepage is carefully set up to show you 8 galleries . . but the iphone interface reveals 33 galleries as they have no way to control it, to make it match the normal homepage.
My SITE is set to show these galleries. My homepage only shows a slideshow. My galleries page shows a bunch. And other pages show other galleries.
I'm rather happy that /iPhone is there so I (or anyone with an iPhone, or many types of mobile devices) can browse my site anytime I/they want to.
Galleries I don't want anyone to see/find, I have them passworded and out of the way.
I feel we are veering way off track here. I am not looking for workarounds or alternative ways of doing things. I am happy with my Smugmug setup. The point of me starting this thread was to highlight and enlighten everyone to the fact that on one hand we have the regular Smugmug homepage which offers us LOTS of control over how our galleries are displayed . . . and on the other hand we have a parallel 'iphone' interface which gives is NO control over how our galleries are displayed.
It is simply an unacceptable (to me) inconsistancy. The iphone interface is a blunt tool and therefore undermines any controls you have put in place on the normal smugmug homepage. This is an indesputable statement of fact. It is not about 'security' its just about having equal control over both interfaces. If smugmug cannot provide this equality (say for technical reasons) then smugmug customers should be allowed to opt out of the inferior iphone interface until such times as they can work out how to do it.
Check the moonriver site as an example (links 3 posts above). Their regular smugmug homepage is carefully set up to show you 8 galleries . . but the iphone interface reveals 33 galleries, as they have no way to control the iphone display to make it match their normal homepage.
If I were Smugmug (which I am not though I have many years of software experience in both security and usability), I would not add features to promote the use of public galleries when unlisted galleries are the more appropriate tool to deliver privacy or security.
I would want to be free to add many more interfaces for galleries in the future besides a web interface that respects your CSS settings. These would include things like a web explorer gallery view built into the PC, a mobile interface for browsers that can't do CSS, thick client tools that show galleries and gallery hierarchies but aren't browsers and thus don't do CSS, integration with third parties for ordering partner products via galleries, etc....
Encouraging customers to use CSS to "hide" galleries from public view will either build a false impression about what they are getting (a wrong customer expectation is the #1 sin in privacy or security) or set them up for disappointment in the future when more new features that list public galleries are added.
Instead, as I have suggested, the better long term solution for everyone is to use unlisted galleries where privacy or non-public access is desired and solve any usability problems that people seem to have with that. Unlisted galleries are already blocked from all forms of "user discoverable" access and Smugmug is already operating under a design-promise to maintain that going forward. For example, unlisted galleries don't show in the mobile interface and it was an automatic design decision for them to implement it that way because it's part of their overall design goal.
Andy can I ask you to confirm whether you think I am making a valid point here?
I think that you are overbuttoning yourself. I think that we have ways for you to hide galleries from the public. I think that we allow nearly infinite customizing. I think that we have a bug with the normal browser use of /iphone, and I hope we can address that bit soon.
jfriend ?????? CSS features to 'hide' galleries already exist. No one is asking for them to be added. Either use them or dont use them. The choice is yours.
Can we please stay on track here . . no-one is asking for 'new' features . . . we just want to be able to have some control over the rather simplistic iphone interface as it is completely out of sync with the controls available to the main Smugmug homepage.
I think that we have ways for you to hide galleries from the public.
Andy, you are seriously suggesting that I change how my normal Smugmug homepage works in order to protect myself from the inedequacies of the iphone interface?
You allow zero customizing on the iphone interface.
I think we have exhausted this for now. I shall post no further on this topic as I am sure it is becoming boring for those who are not interested. I shall watch developments with interest. Thanks for the feedback.
Andy, you are seriously suggesting that I change how my normal Smugmug homepage works in order to protect myself from the inedequacies of the iphone interface?
Sure sounds like it, huh? Unfortunately you're not the only one who would need to make such a change...
The only way I can see to get rid of this glaring hole in a feature I don't want is to password protect (so navigation still works) the galleries I absolutely don't want appearing in RSS or on /iphone and then put the password out in the open so visitors who come in they way I already have set up can find it easily.
I think we have exhausted this for now. I shall post no further on this topic as I am sure it is becoming boring for those who are not interested. I shall watch developments with interest. Thanks for the feedback.
Stuart, I wouldn't expect too much. Andy has already made it perfectly clear he doesn't see it as an issue.
jfriend ?????? CSS features to 'hide' galleries already exist. No one is asking for them to be added. Either use them or dont use them. The choice is yours.
Can we please stay on track here . . no-one is asking for 'new' features . . . we just want to be able to have some control over the rather simplistic iphone interface as it is completely out of sync with the controls available to the main Smugmug homepage.
I wasn't talking about CSS features. It looks to me like you are asking for features to be added to the mobile interface that let you hide public galleries.
Sure sounds like it, huh? Unfortunately you're not the only one who would need to make such a change...
The only way I can see to get rid of this glaring hole in a feature I don't want is to password protect (so navigation still works) the galleries I absolutely don't want appearing in RSS or on /iphone and then put the password out in the open so visitors who come in they way I already have set up can find it easily.
...
Great. Good for you that you want anyone to browse your site from a mobile device.
I don't. Why can't I have that option?
I browse with a pocketPC not an iPhone, you want those and all other mobile devices disabled also? btw, the sites are not set for true mobile browsing, you would need a whole new set of rules applied. But at least using the /iPhone link I can view my photos. ... and another problem is with right click protection on none of the thumbs show in non-iPhone view, only the blank gifs.
Because (again) unlisted galleries break navigation.
There is no navigationon using /iPhone so how can it break?
I browse with a pocketPC not an iPhone, you want those and all other mobile devices disabled also? btw, the sites are not set for true mobile browsing, you would need a whole new set of rules applied. But at least using the /iPhone link I can view my photos. ... and another problem is with right click protection on none of the thumbs show in non-iPhone view, only the blank gifs.
If you're using the /iphone interface then yes, I want those mobile devices disabled also. Simply providing the option to disable the /iphone interface solves the problem.
Its my content. Shouldn't I be able to decide how (look and feel) people experience it?
Come in through the front door (my real homepage), or don't bother if you haven't been given an alternate URL to start someplace else.
There is no navigationon using /iPhone so how can it break?
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
Unlisted galleries don't work with normal (PC browser) navigation - by design, which is why I resorted to the hidden category/subcategory hack in the first place.
If I create a category "Dog Shows", subcategory "2008" and put 12 galleries (one for each month) in the subcategory I have four "supported" options (please tell me if I'm missing something).
1. Public galleries, no hacks. Everything is visible to everyone. (Zero security)
2. Unlisted galleries. Everything is invisible from the homepage, visitors must be directly linked (sharegroup, vanity url, etc possible) to each gallery. However, if you follow the breadcrumb from the January gallery back up to the 2008 subcategory page you are presented with an empty page! (cumbersome without sharegroups, broken navigation no matter what)
3. Password protected. Category/subcategory/galleries are now "visible" (padlocks or featured photos) and navigation works once you enter the password. Requires disseminating the password to everyone who wants to view the galleries (cumbersome).
4. Unlisted and password protected. Combine the deficits of 2 and 3 (broken navigation, password dissemination issues, possible large list of direct links without a sharegroup that still doesn't alleviate the navigation problem).
The fifth (unsupported) option allows for keeping categories/subcategories hidden from people simply browsing my site. Yes, anyone with minimal knowledge can figure out what I'm hiding, but they would have to look for it in the first place. How many sites do you bother slogging through the source and CSS looking for "hidden" stuff?
And it keeps navigation within the subcategory of galleries fully functional.
Of course, the downside to my (unsupported) method is that all my "hidden" galleries are now totally visible on an alternate interface which didn't exist when I signed up and that I don't particularly want active in its present incarnation.
Maybe didn't explain what I meant.:D Using the /iPhone link I click Albums and all I see is page after page of gallery links. Click a gallery and all I see is a photo filling the screen and can scroll down and see all photos in the gallery, each one filling the screen. Nothing else shows.
Clicking Most Popular and again only get the full screen photos.
Only navigation I see is for the timeline selections.
I have no idea - and I don't want to distract our Sorcerers from improving the Cart, working on coupons, packages, etc.
:deadhorseI know, I know this topic was somewhat dead. But, I couldn't help but think of this comment. I know it's not up to me to tell the people at smugmug how to do their jobs, but this comment, and no offence meant to you Andy, as maybe i've taken it out of text but....I just couldn't get it out of my head.
I don't understand why doing something to tweak an existing problem with an existing product is a bad thing. Why have a whole bunch of little things out there that people aren't totally happy with instead of a few things that work really well for each individual?
This is a major thing, in my opinion. I know screen captures exist and that there is even software being marketed to facilitate it, but this small little "iphone" thing made a big mess in the way that I have to now deal with my galleries and my clients.
Is that a good thing for smugmug, to have lots of shiny features that fall apart, break or just plain don't work for the consumer? Why isn't the focus to make this place better...something that I KNOW is a goal, by fixing the features that are already here first and then moving on to reveal the new features?
It comes across as a half a$$ed job.
Now please don't read negative tones in that message, I'm not criticising, I guess that I'm just trying to figure out why concerns about current products are pushed to the side to flash the promise of newer and brighter things in our faces instead.
I want to reiterate that there is nowhere other than smugmug for me, the customer service blows me away, I'm thrilled with the helping nature and the type of service that is second to none, I'm not trying to be critical, just really curious about the reasoning!:D
:deadhorseI know, I know this topic was somewhat dead. But, I couldn't help but think of this comment. I know it's not up to me to tell the people at smugmug how to do their jobs, but this comment, and no offence meant to you Andy, as maybe i've taken it out of text but....I just couldn't get it out of my head.
I don't understand why doing something to tweak an existing problem with an existing product is a bad thing. Why have a whole bunch of little things out there that people aren't totally happy with instead of a few things that work really well for each individual?
This is a major thing, in my opinion. I know screen captures exist and that there is even software being marketed to facilitate it, but this small little "iphone" thing made a big mess in the way that I have to now deal with my galleries and my clients.
That the iphone browsing interface doesn't obey user CSS is *not* a bug and so it's not fair for you to say it's half-assed.
Is that a good thing for smugmug, to have lots of shiny features that fall apart, break or just plain don't work for the consumer? Why isn't the focus to make this place better...something that I KNOW is a goal, by fixing the features that are already here first and then moving on to reveal the new features?
It comes across as a half a$$ed job.
Now please don't read negative tones in that message, I'm not criticising, I guess that I'm just trying to figure out why concerns about current products are pushed to the side to flash the promise of newer and brighter things in our faces instead.
I want to reiterate that there is nowhere other than smugmug for me, the customer service blows me away, I'm thrilled with the helping nature and the type of service that is second to none, I'm not trying to be critical, just really curious about the reasoning!:D
Christine, I like that you criticize. Don't ever stop.
We've never heard about this before, and nobody's ever had the same complaint. Doesn't mean yours isn't valid, Christine. But it also means that we will take everyone's in put into consideration.
I very much doubt we'll change the iPhone interface anytime soon, I'm sorry to say I hope we can fix the bug though.
I've given my reasons, as a professional shooter and as SmugMug as well.
..but this small little "iphone" thing made a big mess in the way that I have to now deal with my galleries and my clients. ...
So don't give the iPhone link to your Clients. It's an internal Smug site thing
and not world wide. How would they ever find it, do your clients
browse these forums?
Dear Christine, I heard about you from one of the Moms at the last horse show. They told me about your work, and I went right then and there on my iPhone - wow, your work is amazing! I'd like to book a session with you and my four girls, with their horses. They're quadruplets, do you think you can handle it? I am interested in making photo books, senior portraits for all of them, and a bunch of quality portraits of the girls with their horses, to give to everyone in my extended family. I suspect I'll need 25 each of 16x20 and 20x30 sized prints, can you handle that?
. . It's an internal Smug site thing
and not world wide. How would they ever find it . .
I know I said I wouldnt post again on this topic but Allen this is too much! Internal Smugmug site thing? Who are you kidding . . iphone target sales is 16 million iphones in 18 months . . ipod touch sales were 9.4Million sold in 2007 Q4 alone . . every one of them has direct broadband access to smugmug iphone pages (with help from Google too), plus there is a featured link on Apples web site! Not to mention every other phone that has web access.
This is a HUGE marketing coup for smugmug . . . its fantastic exposure . . they dont want folks having the option to turn this 'feature' off.
Christine . . this is an easy one for them to implement . . . the fact that they arent going to should tell you that there's a clear business reason for it . . . . . . they might have to suffer losing a few disgruntled customers . . but remember its a much bigger game that is being played. They can only hope they have gambled correctly. I think theres a lot being pinned on the fact that most Smugmug users probably dont yet know their images are being made available in this way.
I know I said I wouldnt post again on this topic but Allen this is too much! Internal Smugmug site thing? Who are you kidding . . iphone target sales is 16 million iphones in 18 months . . ipod touch sales were 9.4Million sold in 2007 Q4 alone . . every one of them has direct broadband access to smugmug iphone pages (with help from Google too), plus there is a featured link on Apples web site! Not to mention every other phone that has web access.
This is a HUGE marketing coup for smugmug . . . its fantastic exposure . . they dont want folks having the option to turn this 'feature' off.
Christine . . this is an easy one for them to implement . . . the fact that they arent going to should tell you that there's a clear business reason for it . . . . . . they might have to suffer losing a few disgruntled customers . . but remember its a much bigger game that is being played. They can only hope they have gambled correctly. I think theres a lot being pinned on the fact that most Smugmug users probably dont yet know their images are being made available in this way.
...smugmug/iPhone is an internal smugmug link. It's their code. Go to any
other website and see if adding /iPhone behind their link works.
Edit: being an internal link can a redirect be set up so it goes to your normal homepage?
What's next? Wristwatch Browsing Interfaces? VR Eyeglasses Browsing Interfaces? I want to be found by any and all. And *anything* I don't want found, I'll make unlisted or locked.
Did you happen to get Mrs Gotrocks email address or phone number Andy!:D
Ok, I understand, I'm thankful that it was brought to your attention about the non right click protection with the iphone extension. and now I'll lay it to rest. Please do update us if and when there are any changes
I thought maybe if I cried long and hard enough someone would send me an iphone to give me the ability to look through all the galleries so effortlessly to see the point of all this, and then I'd shut up!!
they dont want folks having the option to turn this 'feature' off.
Which is why I pretty much gave up on the topic as well.
I do find it annoying that such regularly superb customer service can be spoiled by such an attitude. Its the same attitude that comes through when someone asks for a self-fulfillment feature.
I also found another side effect of the iPhone interface. It does not report activity to Google Analytics since my JS isn't executed, so I can't even see traffic coming in that way.
Which is why I pretty much gave up on the topic as well.
I do find it annoying that such regularly superb customer service can be spoiled by such an attitude. Its the same attitude that comes through when someone asks for a self-fulfillment feature.
Give up? Why on earth would you do that?
Hi, we have discussed this internally, we have heard you folks here in this thread. Nothing would happen immediately, and so all I can do is tell you "thanks" for telling us how important this is to you, and so, "thanks" again
I'm also entitled to my personal opinion, which I've given here in this thread, too.
Too bad the iphone interface, which is nothing but external links to my photos, doesn't respect my choice.
External links are links from non-smugmug sites. I can't post your photos on my blog if you have external linking disabled. The iPhone interface is a SmugMug site. It uses a web browser just the same as someone visiting your smugmug site on a normal computer.
A computer in someone's pocket doesnt make it any more "external" than a computer on someone's desk in Siberia.
My question about this, is there is no contact information as far as I can find on the iphone set up, there is no way to purchase pictures as far as I can tell, so how exactly is it supposed to help us if people can't purchase the photos or contact us?
Comments
You can password protect them from quicksettings AND you can bulk password them in SmugBrowser.
David
Twitter: @WolfSnap
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/WolfSnapDesigns
SmugMug & Wordpress Customization - WolfSnap.com | Custom Domains
Only the delivery mechanisms (API, mobile interface and RSS) are without recourse for the owner to change.
A hidden category (and subcategory too) option would be great, as long as items underneath could be "public but hidden from above" so as to allow for easy navigation once "inside".
You would have to be sure the various interfaces respected the hidden category "global" setting. The iphone interface ignores category and subcategory completely, you are simply presented with dozens of pages of galleries. The RSS feed (IIRC) goes even further and just shows individual images.
The right click thing, we'll be fixing that.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
If you are trying to sell your images and you promote your homepage then yes, there is a big difference. But I (and many others I suspect) have differnet needs from Smugmug and do not need to publicise my homepage. I use an obscure user name and dont give you the url and you would never find my 'public' galleries. All that stuff on your list is great for folks selling pics but I neither need nor use any of it. I appreciate that a lot of 'pros' frequent this forum but I suspect that the vast majority of Smugmug users dont sell anything and just need family, friends and maybe a small group of business contacts to have access to their pics.
I cannot see why anyone would have any objection to us being given the option somehow to opt out of the iphone interface or control it in someway. There have been some great suggestions made in this thread . . lets hope one of them gets taken up.
As an example . . the moonriver site shows 10 galleries on the 'official' homepage . . . but I see 33 'public' galleries by adding 'iphone' http://www.moonriverphotography.com/iphone I dont see what right-click protection will do . . . a simple press of the print screen button gets any image.
My Website index | My Blog
It is simply an unacceptable (to me) inconsistancy. The iphone interface is a blunt tool and therefore undermines any controls you have put in place on the normal smugmug homepage. This is an indesputable statement of fact. It is not about 'security' its just about having equal control over both interfaces. If smugmug cannot provide this equality (say for technical reasons) then smugmug customers should be allowed to opt out of the inferior iphone interface until such times as they can work out how to do it.
Check the moonriver site as an example (links 3 posts above). Their regular smugmug homepage is carefully set up to show you 8 galleries . . but the iphone interface reveals 33 galleries, as they have no way to control the iphone display to make it match their normal homepage.
I'm rather happy that /iPhone is there so I (or anyone with an iPhone, or many types of mobile devices) can browse my site anytime I/they want to.
Galleries I don't want anyone to see/find, I have them passworded and out of the way.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
If I were Smugmug (which I am not though I have many years of software experience in both security and usability), I would not add features to promote the use of public galleries when unlisted galleries are the more appropriate tool to deliver privacy or security.
I would want to be free to add many more interfaces for galleries in the future besides a web interface that respects your CSS settings. These would include things like a web explorer gallery view built into the PC, a mobile interface for browsers that can't do CSS, thick client tools that show galleries and gallery hierarchies but aren't browsers and thus don't do CSS, integration with third parties for ordering partner products via galleries, etc....
Encouraging customers to use CSS to "hide" galleries from public view will either build a false impression about what they are getting (a wrong customer expectation is the #1 sin in privacy or security) or set them up for disappointment in the future when more new features that list public galleries are added.
Instead, as I have suggested, the better long term solution for everyone is to use unlisted galleries where privacy or non-public access is desired and solve any usability problems that people seem to have with that. Unlisted galleries are already blocked from all forms of "user discoverable" access and Smugmug is already operating under a design-promise to maintain that going forward. For example, unlisted galleries don't show in the mobile interface and it was an automatic design decision for them to implement it that way because it's part of their overall design goal.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Can we please stay on track here . . no-one is asking for 'new' features . . . we just want to be able to have some control over the rather simplistic iphone interface as it is completely out of sync with the controls available to the main Smugmug homepage.
Andy, you are seriously suggesting that I change how my normal Smugmug homepage works in order to protect myself from the inedequacies of the iphone interface?
You allow zero customizing on the iphone interface.
I think we have exhausted this for now. I shall post no further on this topic as I am sure it is becoming boring for those who are not interested. I shall watch developments with interest. Thanks for the feedback.
The only way I can see to get rid of this glaring hole in a feature I don't want is to password protect (so navigation still works) the galleries I absolutely don't want appearing in RSS or on /iphone and then put the password out in the open so visitors who come in they way I already have set up can find it easily.
High tech security at its finest.
As well as zero options with respect to RSS feeds (other than total site lockdown).
Stuart, I wouldn't expect too much. Andy has already made it perfectly clear he doesn't see it as an issue.
Stuart, do you get the hint yet? We're "buttoning up" too much.
Great. Good for you that you want anyone to browse your site from a mobile device.
I don't. Why can't I have that option?
Because (again) unlisted galleries break navigation.
I wasn't talking about CSS features. It looks to me like you are asking for features to be added to the mobile interface that let you hide public galleries.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
My Website index | My Blog
Its my content. Shouldn't I be able to decide how (look and feel) people experience it?
Come in through the front door (my real homepage), or don't bother if you haven't been given an alternate URL to start someplace else.
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
Unlisted galleries don't work with normal (PC browser) navigation - by design, which is why I resorted to the hidden category/subcategory hack in the first place.
If I create a category "Dog Shows", subcategory "2008" and put 12 galleries (one for each month) in the subcategory I have four "supported" options (please tell me if I'm missing something).
1. Public galleries, no hacks. Everything is visible to everyone. (Zero security)
2. Unlisted galleries. Everything is invisible from the homepage, visitors must be directly linked (sharegroup, vanity url, etc possible) to each gallery. However, if you follow the breadcrumb from the January gallery back up to the 2008 subcategory page you are presented with an empty page! (cumbersome without sharegroups, broken navigation no matter what)
3. Password protected. Category/subcategory/galleries are now "visible" (padlocks or featured photos) and navigation works once you enter the password. Requires disseminating the password to everyone who wants to view the galleries (cumbersome).
4. Unlisted and password protected. Combine the deficits of 2 and 3 (broken navigation, password dissemination issues, possible large list of direct links without a sharegroup that still doesn't alleviate the navigation problem).
The fifth (unsupported) option allows for keeping categories/subcategories hidden from people simply browsing my site. Yes, anyone with minimal knowledge can figure out what I'm hiding, but they would have to look for it in the first place. How many sites do you bother slogging through the source and CSS looking for "hidden" stuff?
And it keeps navigation within the subcategory of galleries fully functional.
Of course, the downside to my (unsupported) method is that all my "hidden" galleries are now totally visible on an alternate interface which didn't exist when I signed up and that I don't particularly want active in its present incarnation.
Clicking Most Popular and again only get the full screen photos.
Only navigation I see is for the timeline selections.
My Website index | My Blog
:deadhorseI know, I know this topic was somewhat dead. But, I couldn't help but think of this comment. I know it's not up to me to tell the people at smugmug how to do their jobs, but this comment, and no offence meant to you Andy, as maybe i've taken it out of text but....I just couldn't get it out of my head.
I don't understand why doing something to tweak an existing problem with an existing product is a bad thing. Why have a whole bunch of little things out there that people aren't totally happy with instead of a few things that work really well for each individual?
This is a major thing, in my opinion. I know screen captures exist and that there is even software being marketed to facilitate it, but this small little "iphone" thing made a big mess in the way that I have to now deal with my galleries and my clients.
Is that a good thing for smugmug, to have lots of shiny features that fall apart, break or just plain don't work for the consumer? Why isn't the focus to make this place better...something that I KNOW is a goal, by fixing the features that are already here first and then moving on to reveal the new features?
It comes across as a half a$$ed job.
Now please don't read negative tones in that message, I'm not criticising, I guess that I'm just trying to figure out why concerns about current products are pushed to the side to flash the promise of newer and brighter things in our faces instead.
I want to reiterate that there is nowhere other than smugmug for me, the customer service blows me away, I'm thrilled with the helping nature and the type of service that is second to none, I'm not trying to be critical, just really curious about the reasoning!:D
We've never heard about this before, and nobody's ever had the same complaint. Doesn't mean yours isn't valid, Christine. But it also means that we will take everyone's in put into consideration.
I very much doubt we'll change the iPhone interface anytime soon, I'm sorry to say
I've given my reasons, as a professional shooter and as SmugMug as well.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
and not world wide. How would they ever find it, do your clients
browse these forums?
My Website index | My Blog
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I know I said I wouldnt post again on this topic but Allen this is too much! Internal Smugmug site thing? Who are you kidding . . iphone target sales is 16 million iphones in 18 months . . ipod touch sales were 9.4Million sold in 2007 Q4 alone . . every one of them has direct broadband access to smugmug iphone pages (with help from Google too), plus there is a featured link on Apples web site! Not to mention every other phone that has web access.
This is a HUGE marketing coup for smugmug . . . its fantastic exposure . . they dont want folks having the option to turn this 'feature' off.
Christine . . this is an easy one for them to implement . . . the fact that they arent going to should tell you that there's a clear business reason for it . . . . . . they might have to suffer losing a few disgruntled customers . . but remember its a much bigger game that is being played. They can only hope they have gambled correctly. I think theres a lot being pinned on the fact that most Smugmug users probably dont yet know their images are being made available in this way.
other website and see if adding /iPhone behind their link works.
Edit: being an internal link can a redirect be set up so it goes to your normal homepage?
My Website index | My Blog
Yup, for you as a pro, too.
What's next? Wristwatch Browsing Interfaces? VR Eyeglasses Browsing Interfaces? I want to be found by any and all. And *anything* I don't want found, I'll make unlisted or locked.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Did you happen to get Mrs Gotrocks email address or phone number Andy!:D
Ok, I understand, I'm thankful that it was brought to your attention about the non right click protection with the iphone extension. and now I'll lay it to rest. Please do update us if and when there are any changes
I do find it annoying that such regularly superb customer service can be spoiled by such an attitude. Its the same attitude that comes through when someone asks for a self-fulfillment feature.
I also found another side effect of the iPhone interface. It does not report activity to Google Analytics since my JS isn't executed, so I can't even see traffic coming in that way.
And any image I don't want to be linked, I disable external linking.
Too bad the iphone interface, which is nothing but external links to my photos, doesn't respect my choice.
Hi, we have discussed this internally, we have heard you folks here in this thread. Nothing would happen immediately, and so all I can do is tell you "thanks" for telling us how important this is to you, and so, "thanks" again
I'm also entitled to my personal opinion, which I've given here in this thread, too.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
A computer in someone's pocket doesnt make it any more "external" than a computer on someone's desk in Siberia.
My question about this, is there is no contact information as far as I can find on the iphone set up, there is no way to purchase pictures as far as I can tell, so how exactly is it supposed to help us if people can't purchase the photos or contact us?