But thats the point I fear you missing Andy. No-one would disagree with you that this is 'a good thing' for folks wanting exposure . . but I am NOT a professional photographer. My needs are different. I want to turn this 'exposure' off. I am an Architect who ISNT trying to sell images. I have a few select people I want to give my public gallery urls too. I am more than happy with the relative anonanimity and control that SmugIslands and the CSS tools give me, and very happy with the theoretical 'risk' of tech-minded people knowing how to circumvent these controls but I am NOT happy that 10million iphones can see an iphone version of my public galleries with NO control on my part, and NO ability for me to opt out. It seems totally at odds with the level of control that the regular Smugmug pages are sold with.
'Security' is relative. Do you leave your prized photographic equipment : -
a - in a bank vault (think passworded and unlisted)
b - in the trunk of your locked car (think public galleries with Smugisland CSS controls to hide certain categories)
c - on the back seat of your unlocked car at rock concert with 10 million people at it (think iphone pages)
being an internal link, can a redirect be set up so it goes to your normal homepage?
I reckon an optional redirect would take a whole 3 seconds . . (or maybe 2 seconds if your in a hurry) to implement. You could even have a control panel button for it. Thats whats so frustrating . . we have reached the obvious conclusion here that this is clearly a political or business issue (in favour of Smugmug) and not a technical one. Power and Pro users deserve better.
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?
There is a link on the iphone pages to your regular Smugmug pages. It works well and its actually pretty impressive the way it displays. Remember that iphones etc have FULL web access at broadband speeds, so they can view your normal smugmug pages too (just as Firefox and IE can view iphone pages). The iphone pages on Smugmug are just 'simple' html pages arranged in the optimum format for display and finger-touch navigation in the iphone. CSS controls on these pages wont work, hence the big debate about being allowed to opt out if you have gone to the bother of customising your regular smugmug shomepage and you are unhappy with the (relative) crudeness of how the iphone pages work.
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?
Put a contact gallery in
And I would think, after they viewed on a phone, when they got to their computers, they'd go to real SmugMug.
Wow I really am stumped here at the thinking - folks, this is just a phone browser. There *will* be other devices dreamed of
OK I promise . . second last post on this from me . .
Silly. Don't stop posting!
But thats the point I fear you missing Andy. No-one would disagree with you that this is 'a good thing' for folks wanting exposure . . but I am NOT a professional photographer. My needs are different. I want to turn this 'exposure' off.
So turn it off. Galleries unlisted, site locked if you want, galleries locked, etc.
We'll surely consider your request for opting out of 'iphone' and similar type browsing experiences. I can't promise that we'll change things, nor can I promise if / when. But this whole issue is being discussed by all of us in the company, right now.
Iphones (and other gasp! mobile devices) will display your public galleries if people will browse to them using the /iphone link.
We're going to fix the normal browser usage of the /iphone link, too.
So turn it off. Galleries unlisted, site locked if you want, galleries locked, etc.
Stuart and I have both stated several times that unlisted/locked galleries do not work for us (at an intellectual level for our customers, not that there is a genuine functional issue).
CSS hiding is "sufficient" when people are viewing through the traditional SmugMug interface.
Personally I'd like to have opt-out options for all of the optional interfaces (iphone, RSS, Atom, and anonymous API usage) without having to resort to hidden/locked galleries.
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.
Yes, it is A SmugMug site, but its not MY SmugMug site. It has no bio or other contact info, it has absolutely none of my customizations either. It is an end run around (IMHO) the spirit of the "no external links allowed" option.
Why? Because comments like this that keep coming...
Stuart and I have both stated several times that unlisted/locked galleries do not work for us (at an intellectual level for our customers, not that there is a genuine functional issue).
CSS hiding is "sufficient" when people are viewing through the traditional SmugMug interface.
Personally I'd like to have opt-out options for all of the optional interfaces (iphone, RSS, Atom, and anonymous API usage) without having to resort to hidden/locked galleries.
Yes, it is A SmugMug site, but its not MY SmugMug site. It has no bio or other contact info, it has absolutely none of my customizations either. It is an end run around (IMHO) the spirit of the "no external links allowed" option.
It's not an external link, as Lee has already pointed out.
We have heard you loud and clear thanks! I'm sorry that you don't feel our options for privacy, public, unlisted, password etc aren't enough.
We are discussing all of this, and I thank you again for making your point. It's very important for us to hear from you, good/bad/all of it! Don't stop posting.
Put a contact gallery in
And I would think, after they viewed on a phone, when they got to their computers, they'd go to real SmugMug.
Wow I really am stumped here at the thinking - folks, this is just a phone browser. There *will* be other devices dreamed of
I have a contact Gallery, inorder for it to look professional (at least to me) on the regular site, that I spent a fair amount of time customizing, it is set to unlisted and is linked to from a nav bar. Since it is unlisted, it doesn't show on the iphone set up. So I get to decide to either mess with the site I have customized to accomidate the iphone set up, or just leave it and deal with it.
To be honest, I guess my problem with it is really the same problem I had with square thumbs being set as the default. Why is smugmug making decisions about my site for me instead of allowing me to make the decisions myself. (yes I know there is a work around for the square thumbs, but why should I have had to go figure it out and then do it, when I was happy with the existing way it was done)
Neither this issue or the square thumbs is enough to make me even think of leaving smugmug, but if this is the trend, where smugmug makes choices for me, evenutally something might come around that does force me away. Just some food for thought.
I have a contact Gallery, inorder for it to look professional (at least to me) on the regular site, that I spent a fair amount of time customizing, it is set to unlisted and is linked to from a nav bar. Since it is unlisted, it doesn't show on the iphone set up. So I get to decide to either mess with the site I have customized to accomidate the iphone set up, or just leave it and deal with it.
To be honest, I guess my problem with it is really the same problem I had with square thumbs being set as the default. Why is smugmug making decisions about my site for me instead of allowing me to make the decisions myself. (yes I know there is a work around for the square thumbs, but why should I have had to go figure it out and then do it, when I was happy with the existing way it was done)
Neither this issue or the square thumbs is enough to make me even think of leaving smugmug, but if this is the trend, where smugmug makes choices for me, evenutally something might come around that does force me away. Just some food for thought.
Since the iPhone interface honors public & unlisted, and passwords etc, we never felt the need to give an 'opt out' choice. Frankly, I don't know if it's even possible, but our engineers and whole company have seen yours, and the rest of the comments and feedback.
Oh the Thumbnails stuff is getting a v2 enhancement, very soon
Since the iPhone interface honors public & unlisted, and passwords etc, we never felt the need to give an 'opt out' choice. Frankly, I don't know if it's even possible, but our engineers and whole company have seen yours, and the rest of the comments and feedback.
Oh the Thumbnails stuff is getting a v2 enhancement, very soon
Back from the dead, thanks to this post by ivar saying that adding support for password protected galleries to the iphone interface is something "we want to implement".
As far as an opt-out not being "even possible"... baloney. When someone adds the /iphone you're doing a re-direct, so a simple check for the "opt-out" flag could be done at that time and land back the browser on the (real) user's home page.
nothing's ever dead here on Dgrin The posts are always around, searchable
I don't know if it is, or isn't. But I do know that this entire thread has been read by our engineers.
Thanks for posting again, and telling us how important it is to you.
Not to stir the pot, but i thought i would share with the community what i saw at engadget regarding this topic. Apparently a feature of firmware 2.9 as well as iphone 2.0 is going to be able to do screen captures and save images.
The copy of the headline "You might have heard that the latest iPhone 2.0 beta firmware allows users to save web images to its running camera roll for later download to its host machine (or sharing via email). Well, a reliable source let us know that the image capturing good times don't end there: the iPhone now capable of taking full screen caps (like the one above) simply by holding the sleep button, then tapping the home button. We haven't personally tested either technique (we already know what you're thinking: we can't say whether it captures screens from a video), but apparently it flashes white to indicate the cap's been taken and the image has been added to your roll. Let's hope these two neato features make it to the release firmware."
What is smugmug planning to do about this? I bet a little fast track should be necessarey to protect the pros whose work can be stolen this way.
And probably dozens of other free, shareware and open source stuff.
This is not new technology. If you are concerned about screen capturing, watermarking your images is the way to go.
I agree with the watermarking. I personally love the ability and will love the ability to save to my ipod touch. I just thought this was relevenat to the topic
Forgive me if this particular point is already being discussed. I just tried this for the first time. I have one category that has several unlisted galleries in it. In my regular (non-iphone) version of the site, that category does not display at all, but in the iphone version it does display. If I select it, I get a message about there being no public galleries. But why does the category display at all in the iphone version when it doesn't in the regular version?
Forgive me if this particular point is already being discussed. I just tried this for the first time. I have one category that has several unlisted galleries in it. In my regular (non-iphone) version of the site, that category does not display at all, but in the iphone version it does display. If I select it, I get a message about there being no public galleries. But why does the category display at all in the iphone version when it doesn't in the regular version?
You're not alone. Many pros "button up" too much. I'm a pro. I sell my work. I want my work to be seen by anyone, anywhere, anytime.
...
Don't shut out a single visitor or viewer, in my opinion.
viewer, fine. downloading's quite another thing.
My son just got a new non-iPhone and sure 'nuf he can download my pictures by going to the /iphone url, which means that so can his friends... including the ones that, when they want a photo for their website, I've been saying "buy a digital downlad."
Since the iPhone interface honors public & unlisted, and passwords etc, we never felt the need to give an 'opt out' choice. Frankly, I don't know if it's even possible, but our engineers and whole company have seen yours, and the rest of the comments and feedback.
Oh the Thumbnails stuff is getting a v2 enhancement, very soon
any news on the ability to "opt out" of the iphone pages?
I wish I would not have been surfing tonight - honestly.
Frankly, I'm a tad upset.
I used to work in the IT business while ago (another life )... I'm also a bit paranoid when it comes to general data related security and stuff like this...
I wouldn't call me over-the-top-paranoid,... but maybe a bit...
My IT Days are gone... I run a smithy and machine shop these days... sometimes parttime photograph and do a lot of photographing for my own business...
And recently - with the amazing help of others here on dgrin - I spent an awesome amount of time on customizing my smugmug website, which is a mixture of my personal photography stuff and my business related shots...
and now what? www.dgentile.com/iphone basically kills the effort, disables right klick protection (yes, I knew about screencaptures well since windows 3.0 ... and I even had a nifty tool on the even older solaris box running an old X-Window System...) - still right-click and save is what 99% of the users out there will try and for about 85% of the "public" images I'm happy to have it.
Also I spent a good amount of time categorizing my galleries, setting up a structure which allows me to have both my hobby photography and my business stuff "together" without disturbing each other...
again, the /iphone link kills that effort with it's first link (the chaotic show all galleries thing).
RSS Feeds are another topic... but at least, for the initial moment to get the rss feed someone has to actually browse my real website.
Although I would prefer an option for each gallery to be able to switch FEEDS off completely.... but that's another debate.
I don't have an iPhone... and quite probably will never have one, as it wouldn't survive one month at a machine shop...
I truly like my iMac though and am not too happy with the last windows box... so I'm not to be considerd someone who's generally anti-iphone...
To make my point - it should be the choice of the page-owner (in that case a paying smugmug pro customer) on what type of media and format he/she would like to share the photos.
Initially I chose a service being able to be CUSTOMIZED (for good reason),... whilst the /iphone link provides a link back to the "real" page... it's too late for that. my branding, my layout, my stuff has been "broken".
and honestly, it should be my decision alone if would want iPhone users to have the ability to get a DEDICATED format...
as has been mentioned, the Safari browser on the iPhone has no limitation to actually go and visit my real smugmug website....
I thus conclude my rant/post with TWO requests:
1. MAKE THE IPHONE VIEW OPTIONAL.... Please.
I mean, simple as that, have a new option within a gallery that says "Show on iPhone Website"... if it's checked, the gallery will be listed on the dedicated /iphone page .. logic tells me that if this would be possible (and technically it's perfectly possible) that then if I have not checked this option for any of my galleries my "iphone website" will be empty - that would be perfectly fine with me.
2. MAKE FEEDS Optional too... I mean it can't be too difficult to have a global option or same as the idea above with the iPhone option for each gallery....
SmugMug - I'm a pro customer for only almost a year now, and so far your customer support, your service, the OPTIONS have been AMAZING!
It is maybe especially because of this why I am a bit upset about the whole /iphone thing.... I signed up because I wanted to be in control of my photos and the related photo-sharing... I decided to go with a pro account because I wanted FULL Customizing options... because I wanted the freedom to decide how and in what way I present my photos to the public or to selected persons... and this is at least in some ways no quite becoming undermined.
Frankly speaking, I know the iPhone is a cool gadget and it has set a few trends going when it comes to modern comm-devices.... But I would like to be able to choose whether my page is a "part" of a dedicated iPhone thing or not.
I wish I would not have been surfing tonight - honestly.
Frankly, I'm a tad upset.
I am not going to weigh in on the iPhone access to your galleries, but I do think you should have all the information here just so you know how things fully work.
Smugmug does have two mechanisms for keeping the public out of your galleries. The first is an "unlisted" gallery. That's like an unlisted phone number. There's no password, but the gallery isn't advertised to the public and requires knowledge or discovery of 7 digit numeric code and a 5 digit alpha-numeric code (gallery ID and key). So, it isn't full security, but it's hidden pretty well.
The second is password protection. The existence of the gallery is advertised, but a code is required before entry is granted.
Hiding galleries with CSS or Javascript is NOT a security mechanism at all. Heck the existence of the gallery is right there in your HTML page to any one who wants to look or any robot who walks your page contents. Even search engines will find things hidden with CSS. CSS just tells the browser to not display it even though the HTML is all right there in the page.
Further, Smugmug has several other ways that any agent can fully discover all public galleries. They have an API that I or any tool written to use it can use to get a complete listing of all your public galleries. The API will not return unlisted galleries (unless you log in to that account with the API first). This API is used by many third party tools and by some third pary products doing Smugmug integration.
So, while you may be asking for /iPhone control, I wanted to make sure you know that if you aren't using the built-in and supported mechanisms for hiding or securing galleries, there are lots of other ways in and the site is designed that way on purpose because CSS isn't a security or privacy mechanism, it's just a presentation tool. /iPhone is just one way in.
This probably isn't what you were prepared to hear, but if you really don't want people to find some galleries, then you need to use one of the supported ways for keeping them private. And, when you use one of the supported ways, they won't show in the /iPhone interface at all.
thanks for the answer - BUT (yes it had to come, didn't it )
But... security is one issue and I am very well aware of all the security related options smugmug gives me - and make good use of those for where think it's useful.
my main concern, grieve, gripe or whatever it may be called I have with the iPhone formated DEDICATED page is not merely a security issue.
it is, that it willfully breaks my layouting, offers a direct access to all galleries without my other "text" and infos on my website. Removes all my web-based branding and formating and thus deprieves me of a way to control in WHAT MANNER to present the stuff I want to have "on show" public or not.
the secuirty part is clear on my end of the things, those things which are private are private as much as they can be with smug mug (unlisted, password protected)... and I am well aware that these will not show up on the dedicated iphone website.
but again - my problem is not only about the fact that it breaks the simple but in many cases still effective "blockade" of rightclick & saving protection... believe me the average joe is not going to screen copy stuff, cut it out in photoshop to get an image limited to his screen resolution (ok, there are even ways around this)...
But why spend an aweful lot of time customizing and finetuning my website's layout...
why spend a lot of time custom categorizing my gallery structure...
why spend time with things like contact forms, etc...
why - if smugmug basically decides to give every iPhone user the pleasure of browsing my galleries without all the work I've done... and any computer-savy user too who knows about the /iphone link...
Simple as that... I want FULL CONTROL over what way my stuff is being displayd ...
I know that one can install tools to render all CSS Formating useless, I know that I can use automated browsers (bots) to download stuff... I know all that - but it requiers an effort - usually one the normal visitor of my photo-page doesn't make.
it's a bit like my shop... I have security windows (hard to break in...), secure door locks (very difficult to pick)... but if someone really want's to get in, he will - eventually.
the question is how much effort does it require.
... the iphone "feature" is like sticking the "off-switch" for my layout, and stuff right next to my website... or in case someone actually uses the iphone to activate it by default... and I have absolutely no choice if that is what I want or not.
don't get me wrong, I think it's cool that smugmug can offer iPhone support - really I do... but like feeds, I wish I could take control and say "sorry, I don't want it on my page"
Another perspective
I'm an iPhone user, and I just wanted to say:
Andy, thanks for setting things up just as they are. iPhone– formatted browsing is a major part of how I use SmugMug, and it's part of what made me willing to register.
I view some of the requests in this thread as being similar to their asking you to sabotage a highway so that brown cars can't pass in front of their house without their permission.
I'd say more, but I don't want to be disrespectful to anybody.
I'd just add that trying to obey them would be fair customer service, but a piss-poor business and technological decision.
*Good* customer service would be finding a way to address their concerns without spoiling mobile access.
This whole thing seems to be stemming from malformed customer expectations, which I guess couldn't be helped.
without getting disrespectful either, but your comments could be regarded as rather ignorant of some users needs... and after all every single paying customer has the right to voice his concerns and if the company is willing & able find a good solution.
your comparison to the highway and brown cars, from a logic point of view is quite flawed.
it's more like granting every one a peek inside front lawn, even though you've decided only to let visitors in through the main gate.
and as a landlord, that would be your perfect right?
whilst you can't remove the highway (and why would we)... Others and myself alike would like a way to say YES OR NO, to an access to our smugmug stuff in a iphone specific format, which is deprived of all the formatting, branding, information,... not to mention really makes it easy to download images, even though right click protection was enabled (I know that right click protection is not fool-proof,... but it does the job for 65% of the cases at least).
as a Pro-Customer on smugmug I can just say, that first with smugmugs customer support I have always been satisfied... that being the reason for me to stay.
OR as you seem to like allegories here's a different approach:
an art gallery.... they have opening times, decide how and where to hang the paintings, place the statues, install the correct spot- & ambient-lights, redesing the entrance area to match the current exhibition, etc, etc...
now enabling visitors to either take things home or view the pieces ripped out of their whole context would truly ruin the whole nice work the art-gallery has done to display the art in a specific way.
whether you personally like this decision or not, that is an entirely different story... but none the less it is without argue the galleries own good right to decide in what way they present the work...
again, that is really the same with my own photo-sharing...
I'm perfectly willing to share, to display chosen works to the public, but I want to control in what format and what way.
I ask you, honestly hands down, What is wrong with this wish?
and if you would chime in and say, that my CSS can be disabled, that a robotic crawler could be programmed to rip my pictures, that screenshots can be taken - sure,... a good burglar can break into a "real" art-gallery too and steal the paintings... there is always a way, but the question is: how much effort does it need, and is "average joe" able to pull it?
I have also always liked that they adapt new technologies quickly...
But I have never liked that things like RSS Feeds, and IPhone specific access pages are being FORCED on my account.... after when I signed up while ago, iphone access did not exist... and I had no option to "opt out" of this feature either.... so it's basically: "look, accept it or leave"... and that is what I don't like... besides the fact that I don't want a dedicated accesss for iphones (I mean, browse the real website with safari.., no problem here...)...
and adrian, it's fair to say, that no one here would want smugmug to shut down the iphone services completely... many just want control over their own account. And if that is not fair, than I don't know what would be.
and about offering a CHOICE for each customer whether he wants things like this or not being a bad business decision... well, I guess you should seriously think again, about how business does work.
Giving a choice is usually a welcome thing from the customers perspective.
For me, and I guess for others it would be VERY WELCOME and satisfying to have a custom on and off switch for these technologies...
Andy, thanks for setting things up just as they are. iPhone– formatted browsing is a major part of how I use SmugMug, and it's part of what made me willing to register.
I view some of the requests in this thread as being similar to their asking you to sabotage a highway so that brown cars can't pass in front of their house without their permission.
I'd say more, but I don't want to be disrespectful to anybody.
I'd just add that trying to obey them would be fair customer service, but a piss-poor business and technological decision.
*Good* customer service would be finding a way to address their concerns without spoiling mobile access.
This whole thing seems to be stemming from malformed customer expectations, which I guess couldn't be helped.
without getting disrespectful either, but your comments could be regarded as rather ignorant of some users needs...
While I am certainly ignorant of the details of your needs (just as you are ignorant of mine), I think that the issue here is that I am disparaging your wishes.
your comparison to the highway and brown cars, from a logic point of view is quite flawed.
it's more like granting every one a peek inside front lawn, even though you've decided only to let visitors in through the main gate.
and as a landlord, that would be your perfect right?
I accept your quibble, but it doesn't actually change my point.
There comes a point where, in your desire for privacy, one can just ruin other people's experience and make oneself look like an idiot.
So while the desire not to have people peek inside your front lawn is understandable, 50-foot-high walls in residential areas are illegal in many countries; neighborhood associations often limit them; and if you're renting a house, landlords generally won't accomodate you in building them.
I understand the desire, I just don't agree that the request is sensible or reasonable. And, after all, all this is about *public* galleries. If you really want that much privacy, go inside!
I'm perfectly willing to share, to display chosen works to the public, but I want to control in what format and what way.
I ask you, honestly hands down, What is wrong with this wish?
The wish is understandable, but the simple fact is this:
That's not the way that the web works. You don't ever really have that level of control. You never did.
That's what I was alluding to when I spoke of unrealistic expectations.
Different web browsers render things differently. Most have options to disregard all the little javascript tricks that photographers delude themselves into viewing as protection.
Trying to change this in the name of artistic consistency or security locks out a significant proportion of your viewership without ever really giving you the consistency or the security you wanted.
This issue isn't a new problem with you, though; at every stage of the web's development, there have been people trying for greater levels of artistic control, and waves of people deriding them as blind fools afterwards. Browser-specific design, complicated table-based layouts, people have always tried tricks to try to bend the web to their artistic will, and it usually ends up just being a pain in the ass for everyone else.
Years in, I've come to the idea that it really is best to work within the general design specifications of how the web works, as opposed to trying to pretend that a sports car is a truck or vice versa.
and if you would chime in and say, that my CSS can be disabled, that a robotic crawler could be programmed to rip my pictures, that screenshots can be taken - sure,... a good burglar can break into a "real" art-gallery too and steal the paintings... there is always a way, but the question is: how much effort does it need, and is "average joe" able to pull it?
You were never at risk from the average joe.
The people who would be stealing your photographs are people who, in some way, work in imaging.
People stealing low-res images to make cards for quick sale, or for some kind of copy.
They won't be average joes, and they won't really be put off by a little css.
That said, though– the most important thing protecting you is just the statistics involved.
I have also always liked that they adapt new technologies quickly...
But I have never liked that things like RSS Feeds, and IPhone specific access pages are being FORCED on my account.... after when I signed up while ago, iphone access did not exist... and I had no option to "opt out" of this feature either.... so it's basically: "look, accept it or leave"... and that is what I don't like... besides the fact that I don't want a dedicated accesss for iphones (I mean, browse the real website with safari.., no problem here...)...
and adrian, it's fair to say, that no one here would want smugmug to shut down the iphone services completely... many just want control over their own account. And if that is not fair, than I don't know what would be.
The problem is that you are asking for a level of granularity that is likely not technically feasible.
You're asking it from people who you pay a pittance.
And you're asking it in order to gratify a wish that is quite understandable emotionally, but pointless logically, and painfully counterproductive with regard to web usability.
Just one thing as a foreword: labelling me and others "idiots", even in between lines, isn't going to get you very far.
To put it very short: My Photos, My decision.
and to elaborate the issue a little bit more deeply:
I may not fully understand how the internet works, despite the fact that I actually had about 10 years of experience as a network engineer, programmer & system administrator... ok, I admit, it has been a while since I did work in that field... but I believe to have at least undestood the glimpse of the whole thing.
If you're hinting on "social networking", than I have to give in, and say that I truly don't understand all the mechanics behind it, as I personally was never to keen on having 1000 "friends", online relationships, "myspace" pages, internet profiles, chats,... I occasionally use forums when it suits my needs... and I write a good amount of e-mails.
I do have a corporate website to promote my own business, and I do have a photo-website, which serves me for three purposes: Hosting my business related photography, in a manner which makes it easy for me to upload new photos, access them in various sizes for various purposes and to have a good photo-interface for my customers... the third reason being to share my other photographic endavours with those who want to get a look at them.
from a plain technical point of view, I believe to be fully capable of judging how possible or impossible it would be to make my "wish" work.
and honestly - whilst it would take some effort - the effort would be minimal in comparison to the implementation of the rest of the system here... having a filter installed, database related, enabling a user to switch some feature like iphone access on or off, isn't the most difficult task smugmug has been faced with, let me assure you of this.
it's perfectly possible to get this done, in a multitude of ways.
and AGAIN - if told you, that I am quite aware that my photos can be stolen if someone really wants to - that is not my main concern.
What disturbs me mostly is the fact, that I no longer can control the WAY things are being viewed (read my art gallery allegory again in my previous point, it should "draw the picture nicely")...
and that is, as a paying customer, quite frustrating, after having spent so much work - with the good help of others here - to get it done the way I want to.
and to go back to the "landlord and fifty feet tall walls issue"...
that there are regulations it is perfectly true, well unless of course my property would be at a very remote location... but again, read the "art-gallery" thing in my previous text again... it really does say what I think is relevant for this matter.
I believe that another issue is that you don't understand that I don't want to block you with your precious new toy from browsing my photo website... I just don't want to let you inside through the backdoor of my gallery "disrupting" all the sorting, categorization and presentation I have ivested time to create (for good reason, as I wanted to separate business from pleasure stuff...)
My wish not to have this backdoor, wide open, is for sure not counterproductive ... it's not that I don't want others to have it on their own website - I basically just want the key to open or close it at my own preference,... if you believe it to be good to have it open, go ahead and have it your way WITH YOUR OWN PHOTOGRAPHS...
But honestly I must wonder at where your attitude comes from, that you truly believe to know-it-all for others too...
While I am certainly ignorant of the details of your needs (just as you are ignorant of mine), I think that the issue here is that I am disparaging your wishes.
I accept your quibble, but it doesn't actually change my point.
There comes a point where, in your desire for privacy, one can just ruin other people's experience and make oneself look like an idiot.
So while the desire not to have people peek inside your front lawn is understandable, 50 feet walls in residential areas are illegal in many countries; neighborhood associations often limit them; and if you're renting a house, landlords generally won't accomodate you in building them.
I understand the desire, I just don't agree that the request is sensible or reasonable.
The wish is understandable, but the simple fact is this:
That's not the way that the web works. You don't ever really have that level of control. You never did.
That's what I was alluding to when I spoke of unrealistic expectations.
Different web browsers render things differently. Most have options to disregard all the little javascript tricks that photographers delude themselves into viewing as protection.
Trying to change this in the name of artistic consistency or security locks out a significant proportion of your viewership without ever really giving you the consistency or the security you wanted.
You were never at risk from the average joe.
The people who would be stealing your photographs are people who, in some way, work in imaging.
People stealing low-res images to make cards for quick sale, or for some kind of copy.
They won't be average joes, and they won't really be put off by a little css.
That said, though– the most important thing protecting you is just the statistics involved.
The problem is that you are asking for a level of granularity that is likely not technically feasible, in order to gratify a wish that is, ultimately, understandable emotionally, but pointless logically, and painfully counterproductive with regard to web usability.
Dude, the only thing I'm going to say to you right now is this:
I did not call you an idiot;
I do not see you as an idiot;
I did not mean for you to feel as if I called you an idiot;
I regret any ill feelings caused by my using the word;
but really, you're going to have to be a little more generous and flexible in your interpretation for conversation to be either pleasant or productive.
Comments
But thats the point I fear you missing Andy. No-one would disagree with you that this is 'a good thing' for folks wanting exposure . . but I am NOT a professional photographer. My needs are different. I want to turn this 'exposure' off. I am an Architect who ISNT trying to sell images. I have a few select people I want to give my public gallery urls too. I am more than happy with the relative anonanimity and control that SmugIslands and the CSS tools give me, and very happy with the theoretical 'risk' of tech-minded people knowing how to circumvent these controls but I am NOT happy that 10million iphones can see an iphone version of my public galleries with NO control on my part, and NO ability for me to opt out. It seems totally at odds with the level of control that the regular Smugmug pages are sold with.
'Security' is relative. Do you leave your prized photographic equipment : -
a - in a bank vault (think passworded and unlisted)
b - in the trunk of your locked car (think public galleries with Smugisland CSS controls to hide certain categories)
c - on the back seat of your unlocked car at rock concert with 10 million people at it (think iphone pages)
My money is on 'b'.
I reckon an optional redirect would take a whole 3 seconds . . (or maybe 2 seconds if your in a hurry) to implement. You could even have a control panel button for it. Thats whats so frustrating . . we have reached the obvious conclusion here that this is clearly a political or business issue (in favour of Smugmug) and not a technical one. Power and Pro users deserve better.
There is a link on the iphone pages to your regular Smugmug pages. It works well and its actually pretty impressive the way it displays. Remember that iphones etc have FULL web access at broadband speeds, so they can view your normal smugmug pages too (just as Firefox and IE can view iphone pages). The iphone pages on Smugmug are just 'simple' html pages arranged in the optimum format for display and finger-touch navigation in the iphone. CSS controls on these pages wont work, hence the big debate about being allowed to opt out if you have gone to the bother of customising your regular smugmug shomepage and you are unhappy with the (relative) crudeness of how the iphone pages work.
And I would think, after they viewed on a phone, when they got to their computers, they'd go to real SmugMug.
Wow I really am stumped here at the thinking - folks, this is just a phone browser. There *will* be other devices dreamed of
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
We'll surely consider your request for opting out of 'iphone' and similar type browsing experiences. I can't promise that we'll change things, nor can I promise if / when. But this whole issue is being discussed by all of us in the company, right now.
Iphones (and other gasp! mobile devices) will display your public galleries if people will browse to them using the /iphone link.
We're going to fix the normal browser usage of the /iphone link, too.
What more can I say
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Stuart and I have both stated several times that unlisted/locked galleries do not work for us (at an intellectual level for our customers, not that there is a genuine functional issue).
CSS hiding is "sufficient" when people are viewing through the traditional SmugMug interface.
Personally I'd like to have opt-out options for all of the optional interfaces (iphone, RSS, Atom, and anonymous API usage) without having to resort to hidden/locked galleries.
Yes, it is A SmugMug site, but its not MY SmugMug site. It has no bio or other contact info, it has absolutely none of my customizations either. It is an end run around (IMHO) the spirit of the "no external links allowed" option.
We have heard you loud and clear thanks! I'm sorry that you don't feel our options for privacy, public, unlisted, password etc aren't enough.
We are discussing all of this, and I thank you again for making your point. It's very important for us to hear from you, good/bad/all of it! Don't stop posting.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I have a contact Gallery, inorder for it to look professional (at least to me) on the regular site, that I spent a fair amount of time customizing, it is set to unlisted and is linked to from a nav bar. Since it is unlisted, it doesn't show on the iphone set up. So I get to decide to either mess with the site I have customized to accomidate the iphone set up, or just leave it and deal with it.
To be honest, I guess my problem with it is really the same problem I had with square thumbs being set as the default. Why is smugmug making decisions about my site for me instead of allowing me to make the decisions myself. (yes I know there is a work around for the square thumbs, but why should I have had to go figure it out and then do it, when I was happy with the existing way it was done)
Neither this issue or the square thumbs is enough to make me even think of leaving smugmug, but if this is the trend, where smugmug makes choices for me, evenutally something might come around that does force me away. Just some food for thought.
Oh the Thumbnails stuff is getting a v2 enhancement, very soon
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
As far as an opt-out not being "even possible"... baloney. When someone adds the /iphone you're doing a re-direct, so a simple check for the "opt-out" flag could be done at that time and land back the browser on the (real) user's home page.
Thanks for posting again, and telling us how important it is to you.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/14/latest-iphone-beta-firmware-does-full-screen-captures-saves-web/
The copy of the headline "You might have heard that the latest iPhone 2.0 beta firmware allows users to save web images to its running camera roll for later download to its host machine (or sharing via email). Well, a reliable source let us know that the image capturing good times don't end there: the iPhone now capable of taking full screen caps (like the one above) simply by holding the sleep button, then tapping the home button. We haven't personally tested either technique (we already know what you're thinking: we can't say whether it captures screens from a video), but apparently it flashes white to indicate the cap's been taken and the image has been added to your roll. Let's hope these two neato features make it to the release firmware."
What is smugmug planning to do about this? I bet a little fast track should be necessarey to protect the pros whose work can be stolen this way.
On a Mac: cmd-shift-4 and it's instant.
On a Mac: http://www.skitch.com
On a PC: PrtScren
On a PC: http://www.techsmith.com/ SnagIt
And probably dozens of other free, shareware and open source stuff.
This is not new technology. If you are concerned about screen capturing, watermarking your images is the way to go.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
viewer, fine. downloading's quite another thing.
My son just got a new non-iPhone and sure 'nuf he can download my pictures by going to the /iphone url, which means that so can his friends... including the ones that, when they want a photo for their website, I've been saying "buy a digital downlad."
my words, my "pro"pictures, my "fun" pictures, my videos.
any news on the ability to "opt out" of the iphone pages?
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Any plans to even consider it?
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
A simple global setting to force redirection from /iphone to the full home page would be all thats required.
You're already doing the reverse by parsing the /iphone in the url and redirecting to the alternate interface.
Seems (on the surface) not only possible, but down right simple.
EDIT:
Just tried something to positively confirm the "early" parsing of /iphone.
I created a new category named iphone and then created a gallery with one photo in it.
Unlike all the other categories (Events, etc) that can be accessed from http://smuser.smugmug.com/CatName the new iphone category gets redirected.
It even breaks breadcrumbs. In the gallery, if you click on the iphone category link to back up one level redirects to the alternate interface.
I wish I would not have been surfing tonight - honestly.
Frankly, I'm a tad upset.
I used to work in the IT business while ago (another life
I wouldn't call me over-the-top-paranoid,... but maybe a bit...
My IT Days are gone... I run a smithy and machine shop these days... sometimes parttime photograph and do a lot of photographing for my own business...
And recently - with the amazing help of others here on dgrin - I spent an awesome amount of time on customizing my smugmug website, which is a mixture of my personal photography stuff and my business related shots...
and now what? www.dgentile.com/iphone basically kills the effort, disables right klick protection (yes, I knew about screencaptures well since windows 3.0
Also I spent a good amount of time categorizing my galleries, setting up a structure which allows me to have both my hobby photography and my business stuff "together" without disturbing each other...
again, the /iphone link kills that effort with it's first link (the chaotic show all galleries thing).
RSS Feeds are another topic... but at least, for the initial moment to get the rss feed someone has to actually browse my real website.
Although I would prefer an option for each gallery to be able to switch FEEDS off completely.... but that's another debate.
I don't have an iPhone... and quite probably will never have one, as it wouldn't survive one month at a machine shop...
I truly like my iMac though and am not too happy with the last windows box... so I'm not to be considerd someone who's generally anti-iphone...
To make my point - it should be the choice of the page-owner (in that case a paying smugmug pro customer) on what type of media and format he/she would like to share the photos.
Initially I chose a service being able to be CUSTOMIZED (for good reason),... whilst the /iphone link provides a link back to the "real" page... it's too late for that. my branding, my layout, my stuff has been "broken".
and honestly, it should be my decision alone if would want iPhone users to have the ability to get a DEDICATED format...
as has been mentioned, the Safari browser on the iPhone has no limitation to actually go and visit my real smugmug website....
I thus conclude my rant/post with TWO requests:
1. MAKE THE IPHONE VIEW OPTIONAL.... Please.
I mean, simple as that, have a new option within a gallery that says "Show on iPhone Website"... if it's checked, the gallery will be listed on the dedicated /iphone page .. logic tells me that if this would be possible (and technically it's perfectly possible) that then if I have not checked this option for any of my galleries my "iphone website" will be empty - that would be perfectly fine with me.
2. MAKE FEEDS Optional too... I mean it can't be too difficult to have a global option or same as the idea above with the iPhone option for each gallery....
SmugMug - I'm a pro customer for only almost a year now, and so far your customer support, your service, the OPTIONS have been AMAZING!
It is maybe especially because of this why I am a bit upset about the whole /iphone thing.... I signed up because I wanted to be in control of my photos and the related photo-sharing... I decided to go with a pro account because I wanted FULL Customizing options... because I wanted the freedom to decide how and in what way I present my photos to the public or to selected persons... and this is at least in some ways no quite becoming undermined.
Frankly speaking, I know the iPhone is a cool gadget and it has set a few trends going when it comes to modern comm-devices.... But I would like to be able to choose whether my page is a "part" of a dedicated iPhone thing or not.
THANK YOU...
I am not going to weigh in on the iPhone access to your galleries, but I do think you should have all the information here just so you know how things fully work.
Smugmug does have two mechanisms for keeping the public out of your galleries. The first is an "unlisted" gallery. That's like an unlisted phone number. There's no password, but the gallery isn't advertised to the public and requires knowledge or discovery of 7 digit numeric code and a 5 digit alpha-numeric code (gallery ID and key). So, it isn't full security, but it's hidden pretty well.
The second is password protection. The existence of the gallery is advertised, but a code is required before entry is granted.
Hiding galleries with CSS or Javascript is NOT a security mechanism at all. Heck the existence of the gallery is right there in your HTML page to any one who wants to look or any robot who walks your page contents. Even search engines will find things hidden with CSS. CSS just tells the browser to not display it even though the HTML is all right there in the page.
Further, Smugmug has several other ways that any agent can fully discover all public galleries. They have an API that I or any tool written to use it can use to get a complete listing of all your public galleries. The API will not return unlisted galleries (unless you log in to that account with the API first). This API is used by many third party tools and by some third pary products doing Smugmug integration.
So, while you may be asking for /iPhone control, I wanted to make sure you know that if you aren't using the built-in and supported mechanisms for hiding or securing galleries, there are lots of other ways in and the site is designed that way on purpose because CSS isn't a security or privacy mechanism, it's just a presentation tool. /iPhone is just one way in.
This probably isn't what you were prepared to hear, but if you really don't want people to find some galleries, then you need to use one of the supported ways for keeping them private. And, when you use one of the supported ways, they won't show in the /iPhone interface at all.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
thanks for the answer - BUT (yes it had to come, didn't it
But... security is one issue and I am very well aware of all the security related options smugmug gives me - and make good use of those for where think it's useful.
my main concern, grieve, gripe or whatever it may be called I have with the iPhone formated DEDICATED page is not merely a security issue.
it is, that it willfully breaks my layouting, offers a direct access to all galleries without my other "text" and infos on my website. Removes all my web-based branding and formating and thus deprieves me of a way to control in WHAT MANNER to present the stuff I want to have "on show" public or not.
the secuirty part is clear on my end of the things, those things which are private are private as much as they can be with smug mug (unlisted, password protected)... and I am well aware that these will not show up on the dedicated iphone website.
but again - my problem is not only about the fact that it breaks the simple but in many cases still effective "blockade" of rightclick & saving protection... believe me the average joe is not going to screen copy stuff, cut it out in photoshop to get an image limited to his screen resolution (ok, there are even ways around this)...
But why spend an aweful lot of time customizing and finetuning my website's layout...
why spend a lot of time custom categorizing my gallery structure...
why spend time with things like contact forms, etc...
why - if smugmug basically decides to give every iPhone user the pleasure of browsing my galleries without all the work I've done... and any computer-savy user too who knows about the /iphone link...
Simple as that... I want FULL CONTROL over what way my stuff is being displayd ...
I know that one can install tools to render all CSS Formating useless, I know that I can use automated browsers (bots) to download stuff... I know all that - but it requiers an effort - usually one the normal visitor of my photo-page doesn't make.
it's a bit like my shop... I have security windows (hard to break in...), secure door locks (very difficult to pick)... but if someone really want's to get in, he will - eventually.
the question is how much effort does it require.
... the iphone "feature" is like sticking the "off-switch" for my layout, and stuff right next to my website... or in case someone actually uses the iphone to activate it by default... and I have absolutely no choice if that is what I want or not.
don't get me wrong, I think it's cool that smugmug can offer iPhone support - really I do... but like feeds, I wish I could take control and say "sorry, I don't want it on my page"
Fair enough. I understand your point. I just wanted to make sure you understood the whole picture.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
I'm an iPhone user, and I just wanted to say:
Andy, thanks for setting things up just as they are. iPhone– formatted browsing is a major part of how I use SmugMug, and it's part of what made me willing to register.
I view some of the requests in this thread as being similar to their asking you to sabotage a highway so that brown cars can't pass in front of their house without their permission.
I'd say more, but I don't want to be disrespectful to anybody.
I'd just add that trying to obey them would be fair customer service, but a piss-poor business and technological decision.
*Good* customer service would be finding a way to address their concerns without spoiling mobile access.
This whole thing seems to be stemming from malformed customer expectations, which I guess couldn't be helped.
cheers
adrian
(a satisfied customer)
without getting disrespectful either, but your comments could be regarded as rather ignorant of some users needs... and after all every single paying customer has the right to voice his concerns and if the company is willing & able find a good solution.
your comparison to the highway and brown cars, from a logic point of view is quite flawed.
it's more like granting every one a peek inside front lawn, even though you've decided only to let visitors in through the main gate.
and as a landlord, that would be your perfect right?
whilst you can't remove the highway (and why would we)... Others and myself alike would like a way to say YES OR NO, to an access to our smugmug stuff in a iphone specific format, which is deprived of all the formatting, branding, information,... not to mention really makes it easy to download images, even though right click protection was enabled (I know that right click protection is not fool-proof,... but it does the job for 65% of the cases at least).
as a Pro-Customer on smugmug I can just say, that first with smugmugs customer support I have always been satisfied... that being the reason for me to stay.
OR as you seem to like allegories here's a different approach:
an art gallery.... they have opening times, decide how and where to hang the paintings, place the statues, install the correct spot- & ambient-lights, redesing the entrance area to match the current exhibition, etc, etc...
now enabling visitors to either take things home or view the pieces ripped out of their whole context would truly ruin the whole nice work the art-gallery has done to display the art in a specific way.
whether you personally like this decision or not, that is an entirely different story... but none the less it is without argue the galleries own good right to decide in what way they present the work...
again, that is really the same with my own photo-sharing...
I'm perfectly willing to share, to display chosen works to the public, but I want to control in what format and what way.
I ask you, honestly hands down, What is wrong with this wish?
and if you would chime in and say, that my CSS can be disabled, that a robotic crawler could be programmed to rip my pictures, that screenshots can be taken - sure,... a good burglar can break into a "real" art-gallery too and steal the paintings... there is always a way, but the question is: how much effort does it need, and is "average joe" able to pull it?
I have also always liked that they adapt new technologies quickly...
But I have never liked that things like RSS Feeds, and IPhone specific access pages are being FORCED on my account.... after when I signed up while ago, iphone access did not exist... and I had no option to "opt out" of this feature either.... so it's basically: "look, accept it or leave"... and that is what I don't like... besides the fact that I don't want a dedicated accesss for iphones (I mean, browse the real website with safari.., no problem here...)...
and adrian, it's fair to say, that no one here would want smugmug to shut down the iphone services completely... many just want control over their own account. And if that is not fair, than I don't know what would be.
and about offering a CHOICE for each customer whether he wants things like this or not being a bad business decision... well, I guess you should seriously think again, about how business does work.
Giving a choice is usually a welcome thing from the customers perspective.
For me, and I guess for others it would be VERY WELCOME and satisfying to have a custom on and off switch for these technologies...
While I am certainly ignorant of the details of your needs (just as you are ignorant of mine), I think that the issue here is that I am disparaging your wishes.
I accept your quibble, but it doesn't actually change my point.
There comes a point where, in your desire for privacy, one can just ruin other people's experience and make oneself look like an idiot.
So while the desire not to have people peek inside your front lawn is understandable, 50-foot-high walls in residential areas are illegal in many countries; neighborhood associations often limit them; and if you're renting a house, landlords generally won't accomodate you in building them.
I understand the desire, I just don't agree that the request is sensible or reasonable. And, after all, all this is about *public* galleries. If you really want that much privacy, go inside!
The wish is understandable, but the simple fact is this:
That's not the way that the web works. You don't ever really have that level of control. You never did.
That's what I was alluding to when I spoke of unrealistic expectations.
Different web browsers render things differently. Most have options to disregard all the little javascript tricks that photographers delude themselves into viewing as protection.
Trying to change this in the name of artistic consistency or security locks out a significant proportion of your viewership without ever really giving you the consistency or the security you wanted.
This issue isn't a new problem with you, though; at every stage of the web's development, there have been people trying for greater levels of artistic control, and waves of people deriding them as blind fools afterwards. Browser-specific design, complicated table-based layouts, people have always tried tricks to try to bend the web to their artistic will, and it usually ends up just being a pain in the ass for everyone else.
Years in, I've come to the idea that it really is best to work within the general design specifications of how the web works, as opposed to trying to pretend that a sports car is a truck or vice versa.
You were never at risk from the average joe.
The people who would be stealing your photographs are people who, in some way, work in imaging.
People stealing low-res images to make cards for quick sale, or for some kind of copy.
They won't be average joes, and they won't really be put off by a little css.
That said, though– the most important thing protecting you is just the statistics involved.
The problem is that you are asking for a level of granularity that is likely not technically feasible.
You're asking it from people who you pay a pittance.
And you're asking it in order to gratify a wish that is quite understandable emotionally, but pointless logically, and painfully counterproductive with regard to web usability.
Now what am I ignorant of again?
To put it very short: My Photos, My decision.
and to elaborate the issue a little bit more deeply:
I may not fully understand how the internet works, despite the fact that I actually had about 10 years of experience as a network engineer, programmer & system administrator... ok, I admit, it has been a while since I did work in that field... but I believe to have at least undestood the glimpse of the whole thing.
If you're hinting on "social networking", than I have to give in, and say that I truly don't understand all the mechanics behind it, as I personally was never to keen on having 1000 "friends", online relationships, "myspace" pages, internet profiles, chats,... I occasionally use forums when it suits my needs... and I write a good amount of e-mails.
I do have a corporate website to promote my own business, and I do have a photo-website, which serves me for three purposes: Hosting my business related photography, in a manner which makes it easy for me to upload new photos, access them in various sizes for various purposes and to have a good photo-interface for my customers... the third reason being to share my other photographic endavours with those who want to get a look at them.
from a plain technical point of view, I believe to be fully capable of judging how possible or impossible it would be to make my "wish" work.
and honestly - whilst it would take some effort - the effort would be minimal in comparison to the implementation of the rest of the system here... having a filter installed, database related, enabling a user to switch some feature like iphone access on or off, isn't the most difficult task smugmug has been faced with, let me assure you of this.
it's perfectly possible to get this done, in a multitude of ways.
and AGAIN - if told you, that I am quite aware that my photos can be stolen if someone really wants to - that is not my main concern.
What disturbs me mostly is the fact, that I no longer can control the WAY things are being viewed (read my art gallery allegory again in my previous point, it should "draw the picture nicely")...
and that is, as a paying customer, quite frustrating, after having spent so much work - with the good help of others here - to get it done the way I want to.
and to go back to the "landlord and fifty feet tall walls issue"...
that there are regulations it is perfectly true, well unless of course my property would be at a very remote location... but again, read the "art-gallery" thing in my previous text again... it really does say what I think is relevant for this matter.
I believe that another issue is that you don't understand that I don't want to block you with your precious new toy from browsing my photo website... I just don't want to let you inside through the backdoor of my gallery "disrupting" all the sorting, categorization and presentation I have ivested time to create (for good reason, as I wanted to separate business from pleasure stuff...)
My wish not to have this backdoor, wide open, is for sure not counterproductive ... it's not that I don't want others to have it on their own website - I basically just want the key to open or close it at my own preference,... if you believe it to be good to have it open, go ahead and have it your way WITH YOUR OWN PHOTOGRAPHS...
But honestly I must wonder at where your attitude comes from, that you truly believe to know-it-all for others too...
I did not call you an idiot;
I do not see you as an idiot;
I did not mean for you to feel as if I called you an idiot;
I regret any ill feelings caused by my using the word;
but really, you're going to have to be a little more generous and flexible in your interpretation for conversation to be either pleasant or productive.
wishing you all the best,
adrian.