I've created an enhancement request at smugmug.uservoice.com , "Let us arrange images in Virtual Galleries". This specifically addresses our desire to be able to use the regular arrange tools to manually arrange virtual copies of images within a gallery the same way we can with original uploads.
Argh, okay, I'm trying to figure out how to do this and I'm stuck.
One of the things I'd been uploading two copies for was models. I'd have the public gallery for display, and then a private password protected gallery with the same images that the model could access to download copies for their portfolio.
Is there any way to accomplish this via smart galleries and virtual copies? It seems like the answer is no, as the virtual copy always maintains the same permissions as the original, and I need it to have different permissions for the model vs. the general public. But I'd like to know if I'm missing something.
Argh, okay, I'm trying to figure out how to do this and I'm stuck.
One of the things I'd been uploading two copies for was models. I'd have the public gallery for display, and then a private password protected gallery with the same images that the model could access to download copies for their portfolio.
Is there any way to accomplish this via smart galleries and virtual copies? It seems like the answer is no, as the virtual copy always maintains the same permissions as the original, and I need it to have different permissions for the model vs. the general public. But I'd like to know if I'm missing something.
You are correct. The virtual copy have the same permissions as the original so if you want different permissions in one place, you need a 2nd copy.
I've created an enhancement request at smugmug.uservoice.com , "Let us arrange images in Virtual Galleries". This specifically addresses our desire to be able to use the regular arrange tools to manually arrange virtual copies of images within a gallery the same way we can with original uploads.
They've already acknowledged that this is probably not possible, in addition to not being able to limit the viewable size of the virtual copies, hence my suggestion.
They do honor the restrictions. What are you seeing (give links please)?
This is exactly what I was hoping someone would ask!
I sometimes shoot modeling events for magazines, with many models attending.
I would like to create a password protected gallery for the magazine to retrieve my original sized photos without watermarks, for use in their publication.
Then I would like to be able to make virtual copies of certain photos, and send them to the corresponding models password protected, AND/OR public galleries.
BUT, this virtual copy feature would only be useful to me if the virtual copies followed the destination gallery's settings. Or I had the choice.
Great feature tho! Thanks for all the time you guys pour into SmugMug!
collecting request
This photo collecting is great. It fufills a request that I had long thought smumug should have, namely being able to cross link a photo to more than one gallery, rather than having to upload it twice. Saves Smugmug on storage space too.
One criticisim, and maybe somene has already brought this up, but I'm unable to sift through all the posts.
Once I create a gallery and populate it with images collected from elsewhere on my smugmug site, I cant then sort those images inside that gallery. Bummer.
Please fix this?
thanks much for answering this longstanding request.
I've created an enhancement request at smugmug.uservoice.com , "Let us arrange images in Virtual Galleries". This specifically addresses our desire to be able to use the regular arrange tools to manually arrange virtual copies of images within a gallery the same way we can with original uploads.
I'll second this one. Acutally I already did with a previous post.....then I saw this one. I was going to go to the link above, but I'm about burned out with having to create yet another username, log-in, etc.
I saw someone else chimed in that it was not tecnically possible.
Given adequate resorouces most all all things are possible, it comes down to limits of practicality.
I'll second this one. Acutally I already did with a previous post.....then I saw this one. I was going to go to the link above, but I'm about burned out with having to create yet another username, log-in, etc.
I saw someone else chimed in that it was not tecnically possible.
Given adequate resorouces most all all things are possible, it comes down to limits of practicality.
You don't have to create a new username for uservoice. Just pick the openID on the left side of the login and enter your smugmug page name in the form http://username.smugmug.com.
If you already logged into Smugmug, it won't even prompt you for name and password because Smugmug supports OpenID.
Your other settings already allow for use outside your site. This doesn't break any site security you have in place. None of it.
I guess I still don't understand the confusion. If you allow external linking and have no password restrictions, I can embed your photo on my blog, use it as a web graphic for my site, and post it here on this forum. And that's all without attributing the photo to you at all. But because it can appear, with your name and a link to your gallery, in another SmugMug gallery, we have somehow violated your privacy and security?
Yes one is my option and, the other is not. You chose to allow anyone on Smugmug to collect by default from may galleries there is a major difference. As I said when you offer features such as this put them in disabled and, let me know in the messaging service that if I want to opt in I have to enable it. I dont see the problem with doing it that way. I find the attitude of well you allow it anyways as rather flippant towards those who object to it.
passworded photos aren't part of /popular. Only public photos.
I'm trying to create a smart gallery of popular photos from galleries of photos with "NWCT" as a keyword, so I used two rules, one for Keyword:NWCT and the other for "Popular" and set the match rules to "All". I also set the option to "Include my unlisted/password protected galleries" to "Yes" so I'll get results from all my galleries (password protected and not), but I don't see any images from password protected galleries (my own galleries, not others) being displayed.
Doc replied that this is a bug, and that I indeed should see "popular" images from password protected galleries if the "Include my unlisted/password protected galleries" is turned on. Everyone agree?
Hi, is there a way to arrange photos in a virtual collection gallery?
Mika
Hi Mika,
Unfortunately, there isn't. From what I understand, with the way they work, it's a difficult if not impossible option to consider. I'm not sure we'll be seeing this option in the future.
I'm sorry I don't have a better answer for you!
P.S., the standard Gallery Settings>Sort By: options DO work, but no 'arranging'. Sorry!
Steve Mills
BizDev Account Manager
Image Specialist & Pro Concierge
OK, forgive me if this has already been asked a few hundred times. I've read and searched the forums without much luck.
Since the smart galleries aren't able to arrange my images horizontally, I really don't feel a great urge to use them. How do I get rid of the "This gallery has no photos to display yet" message at the bottom of pages like my Find page? Thanks.
OK, forgive me if this has already been asked a few hundred times. I've read and searched the forums without much luck.
Since the smart galleries aren't able to arrange my images horizontally, I really don't feel a great urge to use them. How do I get rid of the "This gallery has no photos to display yet" message at the bottom of pages like my Find page? Thanks.
use the preferred CSS,
.notLoggedIn .nophotos {display: none;}
put it at the bottom of your CSS box, sitewide customizing. This will still show the box to you, logged in - but NOT to your visitors
I saw someone else chimed in that it was not tecnically possible. Given adequate resorouces most all all things are possible, it comes down to limits of practicality.
I suspect the problem is their system's underlying architecture - there's a number of things that've happened here which would point to a deficiency in the underlying architectural implementation, and those kinds of problems are notoriously hard (and expen$ive) to fix.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
As I said when you offer features such as this put them in disabled and, let me know in the messaging service that if I want to opt in I have to enable it. I dont see the problem with doing it that way.
It's a problem because they want you to watch a friggin' blog rather than use the contact email address they've got to pro-actively let us the customers know something's changed.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
I suspect the problem is their system's underlying architecture - there's a number of things that've happened here which would point to a deficiency in the underlying architectural implementation, and those kinds of problems are notoriously hard (and expen$ive) to fix.
Yeah, I've come to the same conclusion. Something has got to be limited at the code base, which is deeply disappointing; problems that stem from these sorts of limitations are rarely addressed in the software world until a major code revision, which would no doubt break themes, functionality, and workflow. Can't have it all.
Just wish some of our very simple workaround suggestions would be implemented.
Yeah, I've come to the same conclusion. Something has got to be limited at the code base, which is deeply disappointing; problems that stem from these sorts of limitations are rarely addressed in the software world until a major code revision, which would no doubt break themes, functionality, and workflow. Can't have it all.
I beg to differ - properly done the old and new systems could be run in parallel, and then incrementally cut over as the new architecture's functionality has been validated.
I'm sure that their "new and improved" changes will make a number of good things like smart galleries and collections possible, it's just not going to be enough for what people are (reasonably) going to want - like being able to have different permissions, price structures, etc. on pictures based on the galleries they appear in.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
It's a problem because they want you to watch a friggin' blog rather than use the contact email address they've got to pro-actively let us the customers know something's changed.
I got an email when the new feature was rolled out...
from news@smugmug.com
reply-to news@smugmug.com
to xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
date Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:32 PM
subject [SmugMug] Quick News: Smart Galleries!
mailed-by smugmug.com
hide details Feb 1 (8 days ago)
Your galleries can now display virtual copies of photos and videos from other galleries. Collect them as you browse or let SmugMug collect for you automatically. Here's how.
---
See more news items.
SmugMug hates spam as much as you do. You opted-in to receive News updates, but if you don't want them anymore, no worries. Just click here.
I got an email when the new feature was rolled out...
For this feature they did - however that's the exception and not the rule. I can count the number of times they've used that notification service on one hand in the time since I've become a SM customer.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
For this feature they did - however that's the exception and not the rule. I can count the number of times they've used that notification service on one hand in the time since I've become a SM customer.
I think you may need to check if any of them are getting marked as spam by your email client. We regularly send these out now for major feature releases. Here are the last few Quick News emails:
2/1/10 Smart Galleries
2/1/10 1099 forms (Pros only)
1/22/10 Stats Extreme Makeover
1/6/10 29 stylish new themes
12/7/09 Coupons (Pros only)
11/19/09 Major card upgrade
I think you may need to check if any of them are getting marked as spam by your email client. We regularly send these out now for major feature releases. Here are the last few Quick News emails:
2/1/10 Smart Galleries
2/1/10 1099 forms (Pros only)
1/22/10 Stats Extreme Makeover
1/6/10 29 stylish new themes
12/7/09 Coupons (Pros only)
11/19/09 Major card upgrade
Ok, I need one finger on another hand.
Andy's position in the past when I called him out on it has been to watch the RSS feed as all other places may or may not get updated. If SM's communications policy has changed so that the informative stuff are sent out via email instead of making the customers check an RSS feed, then I'll gladly retract my prior comment.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
Collected photo "collects" itself from most recent copy of the same photo??
I had a similar problem that I've reported in this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=158591 however, the problem in that thread was not connected with a virtual copy, and also, it was on a "featured" thumb, not a thumb within a gallery. So, anyway... It seems the "collect photo" should not work this way, but it seems it does: The virtual, or "collected" copy seems to be collecting itself from the most recent copy of the original photo, not from the original gallery or original shape of the thumb. I hope this can be fixed, or that there's a workaround. So here's what happened:
3. I made a "real" copy of the original using the "make a copy" tool. I made a real one, because I wanted to be able to move it around in a gallery and also to control the thumb shape for its destination gallery, which is this one: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#783620969_bSLwn . (it's the last photo in that "My Portfolio" gallery) As you can see, I use all square thumbs in that gallery. So on that copy, I made the thumb square using the "Tools> More> Crop thumbnail" tool.
4. Problem: now, when I go back to that gallery with the virtual copies: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Travel/China-1985-to-1987/Chinese-People/11156639_kfbiN#783620969_bSLwn it is displaying the more recent, square, thumb. Also, more bothersome, it is seeing the more recent copy in "My portfolio" gallery as the "original" gallery. I'd hoped to have a number of photos in an original gallery as well as "My Portfolio" and many of them might have a virtual copy elsewhere. I hope there's a way to get them to actually collect from that original gallery rather than the Portfolio or any other secondary gallery which is not the original gallery.
Yes one is my option and, the other is not. You chose to allow anyone on Smugmug to collect by default from may galleries there is a major difference. As I said when you offer features such as this put them in disabled and, let me know in the messaging service that if I want to opt in I have to enable it. I dont see the problem with doing it that way. I find the attitude of well you allow it anyways as rather flippant towards those who object to it.
I think the problem here is that your objection is not at all rational nor accurate as you state it.
You say "You chose to allow anyone on Smugmug to collect by default". No, that is not the case. They can only collect if you already have extremely permissive privacy settings - not by default. Any image you've made even the slightest effort to protect can not be collected - by default.
Secondly, related to the point above, in order to be impacted by the collection feature you would have to have already allowed the entire fricking internet access to both your photo and your bandwidth. And you are fussed by an attributable link in another gallery? This makes no sense at all...
Sorry, I too believe most new features should be defaulted to off - but in this case I'm in complete agreement with the folks at Smugmug. Your crying over spilled milk that is actually still safely in its glass...
WP-Smugmug vs. Collections?
Does the "collect photos" feature work with WP-smugmug?
I thought I'd finally be able to stop using weird keywords to gather photos from various albums for publication in my wordpress blog... but when I ask the WP-smugmug plugin to get feeds from the new photo collections, the photos do not appear in wordpress... just a link to the smugmug galleries.
For example, this gallery is a collected images gallery:
When I get the RSS feed for it ( feed://... ) and paste it into the WP-Smugmug plugin to generate the code, the wordpress page will not display the actual images (as it would with the keyword method) -- just a link to the Collection/Street/ gallery on smugmug.
Should this actually be working and, if so, how? Thanks.
Unfortunately, there isn't. From what I understand, with the way they work, it's a difficult if not impossible option to consider. I'm not sure we'll be seeing this option in the future.
I'm sorry I don't have a better answer for you!
P.S., the standard Gallery Settings>Sort By: options DO work, but no 'arranging'. Sorry!
Well, this kills virtual collections for me. When I create a client gallery, I need to be able to arrange all the pictures in exactly the order I want them in. I'm going to have to go back to making copies instead, which is a big disappointment.
Since virtual copying won't allow us to arrange galleries as we want to, will you now implement batch copying, instead of forcing us to do it one at a time? This is an incredibly tedious process and was the number one frustration that I thought virtual copying was going to solve for me.
If I create a new gallery and establish a smart rule, then enter to the keyword that corresponds to that smart rule
if will not populate until I reaccess the new gallery & re-save the smart rule again -- then the images immediately display.
If I keyword the images I eventually want to put in a virtual gallery first and then create the new gallery and then set the smart rule --- it populates immediately.
I test this again last night & have a gallery still waiting to populate after almost 20 hours. In both instances the albums are using the exact same
quick settings (originals, downloads, public, share, pretty much wide open).
The gallery still waiting to populate is Under Sports, Drill Team 2009-2010 by Dancer, Chey-Anne Chloe 2009-2010.
I set up over 50 galleries for individual football players used scenario 1 -- I had to go back into each gallery & re-save the smart rule to get it to populate -- pain in the butt.
Boolean capability?
If I understand it correctly, the "Match Rules" of Any or All seem to apply to all of the rules and can't be limited to a subset. I'd like to create a Smart Gallery that shows pictures of the coaches for a given team, e.g., using keywords:
Wildcats AND (Coach Mark OR Coach Matt)
If I create the 3 rules and select ANY, I get all of the Wildcats photos. If I select ALL, only pictures that include both coaches are returned. The workaround is to not associate a rule to the team, but Coach Mark might coach both basketball and baseball.
It would probably be difficult to create a user interface to handle the more complex searches. If that is what is limiting this feature, I suggest looking at how MS Outlook deals with this problem when creating custom filters for the calendar. They provide an option to directly write the SQL statement, bypassing the pretty GUI.
Comments
If you think this functionality is a good idea, jump over to http://smugmug.uservoice.com/forums/17723-smugmug/suggestions/471379-let-us-arrange-images-in-virtual-galleries and put in your vote!
http://www.DanielSoule.com
http://www.DanielSouleGalleries.com/Clients
One of the things I'd been uploading two copies for was models. I'd have the public gallery for display, and then a private password protected gallery with the same images that the model could access to download copies for their portfolio.
Is there any way to accomplish this via smart galleries and virtual copies? It seems like the answer is no, as the virtual copy always maintains the same permissions as the original, and I need it to have different permissions for the model vs. the general public. But I'd like to know if I'm missing something.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
This is exactly what I was hoping someone would ask!
I sometimes shoot modeling events for magazines, with many models attending.
I would like to create a password protected gallery for the magazine to retrieve my original sized photos without watermarks, for use in their publication.
Then I would like to be able to make virtual copies of certain photos, and send them to the corresponding models password protected, AND/OR public galleries.
BUT, this virtual copy feature would only be useful to me if the virtual copies followed the destination gallery's settings. Or I had the choice.
Great feature tho! Thanks for all the time you guys pour into SmugMug!
This photo collecting is great. It fufills a request that I had long thought smumug should have, namely being able to cross link a photo to more than one gallery, rather than having to upload it twice. Saves Smugmug on storage space too.
One criticisim, and maybe somene has already brought this up, but I'm unable to sift through all the posts.
Once I create a gallery and populate it with images collected from elsewhere on my smugmug site, I cant then sort those images inside that gallery. Bummer.
Please fix this?
thanks much for answering this longstanding request.
Jeff
I'll second this one. Acutally I already did with a previous post.....then I saw this one. I was going to go to the link above, but I'm about burned out with having to create yet another username, log-in, etc.
I saw someone else chimed in that it was not tecnically possible.
Given adequate resorouces most all all things are possible, it comes down to limits of practicality.
If you already logged into Smugmug, it won't even prompt you for name and password because Smugmug supports OpenID.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
http://joves.smugmug.com/
I'm trying to create a smart gallery of popular photos from galleries of photos with "NWCT" as a keyword, so I used two rules, one for Keyword:NWCT and the other for "Popular" and set the match rules to "All". I also set the option to "Include my unlisted/password protected galleries" to "Yes" so I'll get results from all my galleries (password protected and not), but I don't see any images from password protected galleries (my own galleries, not others) being displayed.
Doc replied that this is a bug, and that I indeed should see "popular" images from password protected galleries if the "Include my unlisted/password protected galleries" is turned on. Everyone agree?
Hi, is there a way to arrange photos in a virtual collection gallery?
Mika
Michael Bastia (MB) Photographie Web Site :lust
Unfortunately, there isn't. From what I understand, with the way they work, it's a difficult if not impossible option to consider. I'm not sure we'll be seeing this option in the future.
I'm sorry I don't have a better answer for you!
P.S., the standard Gallery Settings>Sort By: options DO work, but no 'arranging'. Sorry!
BizDev Account Manager
Image Specialist & Pro Concierge
http://www.downriverphotography.com
Since the smart galleries aren't able to arrange my images horizontally, I really don't feel a great urge to use them. How do I get rid of the "This gallery has no photos to display yet" message at the bottom of pages like my Find page? Thanks.
Mark Ledingham
Please visit Mark Ledingham Photography ...You might just like it!
use the preferred CSS,
.notLoggedIn .nophotos {display: none;}
put it at the bottom of your CSS box, sitewide customizing. This will still show the box to you, logged in - but NOT to your visitors
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Thank you, Andy, this did it!
Mark Ledingham
Please visit Mark Ledingham Photography ...You might just like it!
Just wish some of our very simple workaround suggestions would be implemented.
I'm sure that their "new and improved" changes will make a number of good things like smart galleries and collections possible, it's just not going to be enough for what people are (reasonably) going to want - like being able to have different permissions, price structures, etc. on pictures based on the galleries they appear in.
I got an email when the new feature was rolled out...
from news@smugmug.com
reply-to news@smugmug.com
to xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
date Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:32 PM
subject [SmugMug] Quick News: Smart Galleries!
mailed-by smugmug.com
hide details Feb 1 (8 days ago)
Your galleries can now display virtual copies of photos and videos from other galleries. Collect them as you browse or let SmugMug collect for you automatically. Here's how.
---
See more news items.
SmugMug hates spam as much as you do. You opted-in to receive News updates, but if you don't want them anymore, no worries. Just click here.
I think you may need to check if any of them are getting marked as spam by your email client. We regularly send these out now for major feature releases. Here are the last few Quick News emails:
2/1/10 Smart Galleries
2/1/10 1099 forms (Pros only)
1/22/10 Stats Extreme Makeover
1/6/10 29 stylish new themes
12/7/09 Coupons (Pros only)
11/19/09 Major card upgrade
Andy's position in the past when I called him out on it has been to watch the RSS feed as all other places may or may not get updated. If SM's communications policy has changed so that the informative stuff are sent out via email instead of making the customers check an RSS feed, then I'll gladly retract my prior comment.
I had a similar problem that I've reported in this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=158591 however, the problem in that thread was not connected with a virtual copy, and also, it was on a "featured" thumb, not a thumb within a gallery. So, anyway... It seems the "collect photo" should not work this way, but it seems it does: The virtual, or "collected" copy seems to be collecting itself from the most recent copy of the original photo, not from the original gallery or original shape of the thumb. I hope this can be fixed, or that there's a workaround. So here's what happened:
1. I put a photo in this gallery: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Travel/China-1985-to-1987/Around-Nanchong/11130771_bdjTb#784669210_6b9W4 (the photo of the Buddhist Nun in a brown robe) Its thumb is in original shape.
2. Then I "collected" it and put it in this gallery: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Travel/China-1985-to-1987/Chinese-People/11156639_kfbiN#783620969_bSLwn . All was fine until....
3. I made a "real" copy of the original using the "make a copy" tool. I made a real one, because I wanted to be able to move it around in a gallery and also to control the thumb shape for its destination gallery, which is this one: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#783620969_bSLwn . (it's the last photo in that "My Portfolio" gallery) As you can see, I use all square thumbs in that gallery. So on that copy, I made the thumb square using the "Tools> More> Crop thumbnail" tool.
4. Problem: now, when I go back to that gallery with the virtual copies: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Travel/China-1985-to-1987/Chinese-People/11156639_kfbiN#783620969_bSLwn it is displaying the more recent, square, thumb. Also, more bothersome, it is seeing the more recent copy in "My portfolio" gallery as the "original" gallery. I'd hoped to have a number of photos in an original gallery as well as "My Portfolio" and many of them might have a virtual copy elsewhere. I hope there's a way to get them to actually collect from that original gallery rather than the Portfolio or any other secondary gallery which is not the original gallery.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
You say "You chose to allow anyone on Smugmug to collect by default". No, that is not the case. They can only collect if you already have extremely permissive privacy settings - not by default. Any image you've made even the slightest effort to protect can not be collected - by default.
Secondly, related to the point above, in order to be impacted by the collection feature you would have to have already allowed the entire fricking internet access to both your photo and your bandwidth. And you are fussed by an attributable link in another gallery? This makes no sense at all...
Sorry, I too believe most new features should be defaulted to off - but in this case I'm in complete agreement with the folks at Smugmug. Your crying over spilled milk that is actually still safely in its glass...
Does the "collect photos" feature work with WP-smugmug?
I thought I'd finally be able to stop using weird keywords to gather photos from various albums for publication in my wordpress blog... but when I ask the WP-smugmug plugin to get feeds from the new photo collections, the photos do not appear in wordpress... just a link to the smugmug galleries.
For example, this gallery is a collected images gallery:
http://photos.ultrasomething.com/Collection/Street/
When I get the RSS feed for it ( feed://... ) and paste it into the WP-Smugmug plugin to generate the code, the wordpress page will not display the actual images (as it would with the keyword method) -- just a link to the Collection/Street/ gallery on smugmug.
Should this actually be working and, if so, how? Thanks.
-egor
http://ultrasomething.smugmug.com
Well, this kills virtual collections for me. When I create a client gallery, I need to be able to arrange all the pictures in exactly the order I want them in. I'm going to have to go back to making copies instead, which is a big disappointment.
Since virtual copying won't allow us to arrange galleries as we want to, will you now implement batch copying, instead of forcing us to do it one at a time? This is an incredibly tedious process and was the number one frustration that I thought virtual copying was going to solve for me.
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=158660 - I reported this yesterday under Bug Reporting.
Curious whether I'm the only one with this issue?
If I create a new gallery and establish a smart rule, then enter to the keyword that corresponds to that smart rule
if will not populate until I reaccess the new gallery & re-save the smart rule again -- then the images immediately display.
If I keyword the images I eventually want to put in a virtual gallery first and then create the new gallery and then set the smart rule --- it populates immediately.
I test this again last night & have a gallery still waiting to populate after almost 20 hours. In both instances the albums are using the exact same
quick settings (originals, downloads, public, share, pretty much wide open).
The gallery still waiting to populate is Under Sports, Drill Team 2009-2010 by Dancer, Chey-Anne Chloe 2009-2010.
I set up over 50 galleries for individual football players used scenario 1 -- I had to go back into each gallery & re-save the smart rule to get it to populate -- pain in the butt.
Thanks, Monica
If I understand it correctly, the "Match Rules" of Any or All seem to apply to all of the rules and can't be limited to a subset. I'd like to create a Smart Gallery that shows pictures of the coaches for a given team, e.g., using keywords:
Wildcats AND (Coach Mark OR Coach Matt)
If I create the 3 rules and select ANY, I get all of the Wildcats photos. If I select ALL, only pictures that include both coaches are returned. The workaround is to not associate a rule to the team, but Coach Mark might coach both basketball and baseball.
It would probably be difficult to create a user interface to handle the more complex searches. If that is what is limiting this feature, I suggest looking at how MS Outlook deals with this problem when creating custom filters for the calendar. They provide an option to directly write the SQL statement, bypassing the pretty GUI.