I just feel like this is the kind of response that is rather frustrating and, well, smug (with a lower-case "s"!) to people. When you say "we" didn't change your gallery or photos... ok, no one who has a problem like photos inexplicably over-rotating
Anna Lisa, my comment had -nothing- to do with rotating images issue and everything to do with a whole other thread that Samir posted about a hidden image becoming unhidden. I'm sorry for the confusion.
We're paying full and complete attention to this thread, and what you and others are posting here. And we want to get to the bottom of it.
Someone representing Smug could have decided 3 weeks ago that this merited an engineer actually bugging it. We could have avoided the time, the crap, the bad feelings. A fix might have even happened by last week. At the very very least, the rest of us who have had these issues could have gotten some very basic answers to our most basic questions, which we still haven't gotten. I will put those questions in another post, because I, for one, need to know.
We have, and we still are investigating, Anna Lisa. The issue is this is not reprducible 100% of the time. When it is, we will be able to fix it.
If you have open questions needing answering, I want to make sure they get answered, thanks - please post them - and if you could be as concise as possible, with examples/links that'd be great.
Now what we should be hearing is "Thanks for noticing that something needed attention. Thanks for taking your time to explain it and monitor it." not something that sounds like "Smug can't have been doing anything wrong. There are never bugs, and no one else is having trouble.... i.e. it must be your imagination."
We never, ever believe this and I try to take great pains to make sure every issue, no matter how small or big, gets acknowledged. We want to fix everything, and we try very hard to do so. Sometimes, some things take longer than others, and I wish that weren't so. Thanks for so passionately posting about this, Anna Lisa.
Anna Lisa, my comment had -nothing- to do with rotating images issue and everything to do with a whole other thread that Samir posted about a hidden image becoming unhidden. I'm sorry for the confusion.
We're paying full and complete attention to this thread, and what you and others are posting here. And we want to get to the bottom of it.
There wasn't any confusion. I know that particular response was about the more recent issue. I meant that we've heard the same or way too similar type of response to the rotation issue and so many other issues, especially in recent months, and it's disconcerting when what we all want is for the site to run smoothly. This thread started a long time ago, mostly with little resolution.
You know when I posted a few weeks back about "Recent Photos" not working correctly? I remember thinking, hmmm, this hasn't been working for at least a couple weeks. I wonder why I'm not hearing about it. Maybe it's me. I don't wanna say something & hear, "no one else is having this problem". So I waited. I'd check it now & then & never saw recent photos, just copies and moves. Finally I reported it. Still never heard that anyone else noticed the issue, but maybe people contacted "help", I wouldn't know. Even then, it took awhile before I got anyone convinced it really wasn't working at all. I took time to explain the details. Eventually, it got bugged. It's still not fixed, but at least someone heard it. A lot of people simply don't know, don't notice, or don't say when something's not right. I can see why they don't say. The process is just too clunky. You too often end up just feeling like a PITA for trying to report it, like there's a lot of doubt anything could be happening.
On the"Recent Photos" thing, it seems all it would have taken was for a few of the heroes here to check their own sites, and they'd have immediately seen it wasn't working. No one really needed me to go into all kinds of detail to see something so simple & so obvious. So I just don't really get that process... why it's gotta be so clunky for customers when so many Smug heroes have their own sites and could just simply check out a bug.
So where are we on the status of this issue? I ran into some rotating funkiness in the last few days, and the 'stuck' images that Rogue1 and I went through a while back are still stuck, and I haven't touched the gallery to preserve the state of everything for diagnosis.
So where are we on the status of this issue? I ran into some rotating funkiness in the last few days, and the 'stuck' images that Rogue1 and I went through a while back are still stuck, and I haven't touched the gallery to preserve the state of everything for diagnosis.
Please write our Support Heroes, ATTN: Doc, with details on the "funkiness" so we can try to reproduce, and add more info to this difficult situation, Samir.
I've been so busy I haven't been able to post this:
"I've been able to reproduce the issue on my site, failed rotations and 'over' rotations - and I've passed this on to the engineers - they will be looking into it"
Looks like Sean has run into the same thing we have. Yay!
Please write our Support Heroes, ATTN: Doc, with details on the "funkiness" so we can try to reproduce, and add more info to this difficult situation, Samir.
Sean (Rogue1) was on the case, but I don't know what happened. Sean has all the relevant info on the case. I know it's going to be a tough issue to trace, and just wanted to see if there was any progress.
"Echo Base to Rogue 1. Echo Base to Rogue 1. Do you copy Rogue 1?"
A month later, just wondering the status again. Just ran into an image that did a 180 when it should've been 90 when working on a gallery. Whatever is broken still is. :cry
"Echo Base to Rogue 1. Echo Base to Rogue 1. Do you copy Rogue 1?"
A month later, just wondering the status again. Just ran into an image that did a 180 when it should've been 90 when working on a gallery. Whatever is broken still is. :cry
Precise, direct link to the image? And, we may need the original image, too.
Precise, direct link to the image? And, we may need the original image, too.
I've already taken care of the problem with that image. And Sean has links to the gallery where we did our testing. He requested that the gallery remain untouched so that it could be looked at by programmers, support, whoever. And it's remained there in the untouched state. Just for giggles I looked at the gallery and the two 'stuck' images that happened during our testing months ago are still 'stuck'.
I understand the need to have precise information to evaluate what may be going on, but it's already all there and Sean has it. There's nothing more I can give that hasn't already been given. I'm just wondering where we are on the whole thing because the problem is still there.
I'd really like to know where we are with this rotate thing also. I found images again that had rotated too far. I forgot to take note of which ones, because I was in a rush, so I'm sorry about that part. I'd said earlier though that I had a few questions to ask at some point, & I keep forgetting to do that. I have just one right now, & it's for anyone who can answer definitively. For me, it's probably the most important question that will at least help me to be a lot more helpful when I run into the rotate issue again.
So here it is: When I've first uploaded a batch of photos to a gallery, I've often immediately gone in & done 2 things. I first arrange in chronological order-- takes me about a minute. Then I see which photos need rotating Left right away-- there are almost always a few that need it. So I select them & hit "rotate" & typically go on to something else such as captioning, etc. Now here's my question: Is it "safe" to assume that any photos which have arrived in the gallery not rotated correctly are not going to change on their own? In other words, I'm not jumping the gun on them by going right in & rotating them, right? I mean, do they ever change (right themselves) after arriving in a gallery, or do they always stay in the position they've landed in?
I'm asking this because of one possibility I thought about after we'd gone 'round & 'round on this topic ad nauseam. I wondered if I (or Samir, or anyone) have sometimes gone & rotated a photo which was eventually going to rotate on its own anyway. Obviously, if we did that & then it rotated itself as well, it would probably go one turn too far. I'm praying that someone knows the answer to this w/o a doubt, because I'm about to have my sister do some wedding uploading & it would be great to know this rather than doing a bunch of guesswork. Thank you!
We'll rotate immediately any file that has the proper exif rotation tag built into it.
Ok, thanks for the answer, Andy. So if it's not in the correct orientation right after landing in the gallery, it's not gonna be unless I go in & fix it, right? If so, that's actually the answer I was hoping for, because it's less ambiguous. I mean, as long as I know that I should be rotating it, that's one less variable to figure out!
I'd really like to know where we are with this rotate thing also. I found images again that had rotated too far.
I would too. I saw some get goofy on me recently as well. I've very disappointed that there hasn't been any updates to this after Sean and I did find something was amiss. It's one thing if you and I are smoking crack, but Sean ran into the exact same issue, and saw it acting funny in the rotate queue. I know it's a hard to track down bug, but it's just base case testing, which all code should go through.
So here it is: When I've first uploaded a batch of photos to a gallery, I've often immediately gone in & done 2 things. I first arrange in chronological order-- takes me about a minute. Then I see which photos need rotating Left right away-- there are almost always a few that need it. So I select them & hit "rotate" & typically go on to something else such as captioning, etc. Now here's my question: Is it "safe" to assume that any photos which have arrived in the gallery not rotated correctly are not going to change on their own? In other words, I'm not jumping the gun on them by going right in & rotating them, right? I mean, do they ever change (right themselves) after arriving in a gallery, or do they always stay in the position they've landed in?
In my experience, the rotate tool works flawlessly with exif orientation sensors, so whatever orientation they arrive in your gallery, that's what you've got. The watermarking tool works the same way.
And now that I think about it, back in the day after watermarking was introduced, it had similar issues of not watermarking like the rotate tool of not rotating. You had to go back and watermark a couple of times before it 'stuck' on some images. There's probably some codebase relation between the two functions that may be at the root of it. I don't know if watermarking still has issues, but if it does, that's probably where the issue comes from.
Wow. I don't know what happened to this. I'm sorry you've put so much work into helping figure this out, Samir, to see few results. Ok, so here's a link to a photo that had (has) problems. It's in an unlisted gallery, but I trust you can see it if I give you the link: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Family/Chris-Chara/Chara-and-Chris-Reception-One/14530694_AfDhB#1168893020_MoG7K Here's the story on it: This photo was in another gallery. I had to move it to the present gallery. But I have not touched it otherwise since the failed rotation attempt. This photo came into the gallery vertical when it should be horizontal. But it came in vertical the opposite way from how it is now. In other words, it obviously needed one 90 degree turn clockwise to set it straight, i.e. set it into landscape orientation. So that's what I did. I selected it, then chose "Right". This is a very simple, straightforward task.
Awhile later I noticed it had rotated 90 degrees too far, i.e. the way you see it now! All I've done with it since then is moved it to this gallery. This, as I've been trying & trying to tell Smug, is what always seems to happen when my rotations fail. They turn one turn extra. I did this a couple hours ago, so it's not that I haven't waited long enough. About 5 min. prior to rotating this one, I had rotated one or two others that needed a left rotation. I made sure to wait in-between so that there should have been no confusion for the rotation tool. I hope someone can look into this, & I hope this info. helps. I also hope I will be believed when I tell you this is typical behavior for a few of my rotations-- i.e. rotating one step too far. Why would I want to make this up?!
Please yousendit to me the original file. I want to upload it and see what happens. Thanks. Put ATTN: Andy in the yousendit.
Andy, I don't mean to be a problem, but what difference will the file make? My files are different than Lisa's and I've had the problem too. Sean ran tests on my gallery and did the rotates himself and ran into the issue. What happened to his notes? What happened to him contacting the engineers?
There's no point in doing all this endless diagnosis if you guys aren't going to try to fix it. It's just wasting our time even more.
There's no point in doing all this endless diagnosis if you guys aren't going to try to fix it. It's just wasting our time even more.
I don't waste time. I want Anna Lisa's original file and I want to replicate exactly what she said happened. We still do not have a replicable, repeatable scenario on our test site that I can go to a Sorcerer with and say, "fix this."
I don't waste time. I want Anna Lisa's original file and I want to replicate exactly what she said happened. We still do not have a replicable, repeatable scenario on our test site that I can go to a Sorcerer with and say, "fix this."
Thank you.
This is an intermittent issue with a very small chance of occurring. You're going to need to do rotates thousands of times, in a controlled environment tracing all the variables to find this bug. Having us send in a file is a waste of time imo. It's not the files that are the culprit here.
This is an intermittent issue with a very small chance of occurring. You're going to need to do rotates thousands of times, in a controlled environment tracing all the variables to find this bug. Having us send in a file is a waste of time imo. It's not the files that are the culprit here.
Yeah, this sounds like a bug that will be found by developers who know the relevant code coming up with theoretical ways that it could happen, then instrumenting the code with log msgs to find out which theoretical case is actually happening. And then, it will probably be difficult to test unless the developer can describe how to create the actual circumstance that causes it. Probably not going to find it from outside the black box.
Please yousendit to me the original file. I want to upload it and see what happens. Thanks. Put ATTN: Andy in the yousendit.
Ok, Andy-- I just sent the file. I'd added a note to you, but after I went to the trouble of writing it all up, it disappeared & I got the message that I had to stay under 100 characters. Sheesh, couldn't I have been stopped first? Anyway. So, Here's the very strange thing: when I went back in my original folder to look at the file, I saw that the thumb is in the correct orientation (landscape) when I look at it in thumbnail view in my folder, or even if I pull it into Irfanview. I don't have to rotate it there. Then, there are tons of others that are in the wrong orientation when viewed in my folder, but they ended up in correct orientation when uploaded to Smug. I only had to rotate 2 or 3 in a gallery of 30 or so. It's all very weird.
Yeah, this sounds like a bug that will be found by developers who know the relevant code coming up with theoretical ways that it could happen, then instrumenting the code with log msgs to find out which theoretical case is actually happening. And then, it will probably be difficult to test unless the developer can describe how to create the actual circumstance that causes it. Probably not going to find it from outside the black box.
That's what I was thinking, but it seems Andy disagrees.
Sorry, it's NOT a waste of time. I promise I'm not in the practice of wasting my time or yours. We'd LOVE to find out why this is happening for you.
July 29, 2009 is when this issue was initially pointed out--over 1.5yrs ago. And life has taught me that actions speak louder than words. I'm just going to leave it at that.
I'd like to see this fixed too, but frankly, I've given up. Now I just curse SM at the top of my lungs when the annoyance gets too much.
Sorry, it's NOT a waste of time. I promise I'm not in the practice of wasting my time or yours. We'd LOVE to find out why this is happening for you.
Sorry-- I did not see that you uploaded screen shots. I don't know what to tell you that will help, except the following:
1. Earlier in this thread, you or others (Sean, I don't remember) were able to actually tell us what you could see "under that hood" that we'd done with our files.... i.e. what had registered in the file's SmugMug history. HOwever, I haven't heard any analysis like that of my file. It's still sitting in the gallery un-rotated, just as it was when I sent you the link. So-- can you see what I did to it? Can you see that I already did to it exactly what you did here in your screen shot? (I'm just curious why I haven't heard this analysis, when it seemed all-important before)
2. Why would this shot come into SmugMug un-rotated anyway? I wonder if having a sorcerer figure out that mystery would solve the rest. This is the part that's odd to me-- don't you find it curious too? "We always do the right thing." You see the shot. Obviously it's a straight-on, landscape-oriented shot. I didn't have my camera at a weird angle-- in fact, it's fairly level with the horizon. What's more -- as I told you, when viewed in my folder on the computer, the thumb is correctly rotated! And it does not need rotation when viewed in Irfanview. Oddly though, I had a bunch of vertical shots of this same nephew in the same spot. They are all un-rotated (in the wrong orientation) when viewed in my computer folder. Yet, they came into SmugMug correctly rotated & needed no help from me. This is one thing I'm wondering: Does something in the rotation programming sometimes recognize that this is a portrait & want it to stay vertical even though it's a landscape-oriented portrait? I don't think that addresses the kind of shots Samir is taking though.
3. Yes, I see this did not happen to you this time, Andy. But we've already said again & again that it happens intermittently & unpredicably (so far). It happened a bunch of times in December, but I just didn't have the time to go through all this detail for you with each problematic file-- it takes time, clearly. I can try to report each file for awhile, but I can't replicate steps each time because the steps are the same: Rotate file one direction. Return to gallery. File turns too far.... sometimes.
4. We still haven't heard what has happened to all the research & testing that Sean did with Samir. This is frustrating. It should be obvious why Samir is saying the current mode of testing is a waste of time.... for heaven's sakes, he went to a lot of time & energy & generated a lot of data with someone who was evidently looking at it from a much deeper angle, and now... nothing. No word about it from SmugMug, no follow-through with actual results... just a much less scientific test, and no reference to all the work that's come before. You really can't get on people's case for getting upset when they've put in so much time to try to help & then it all just drops off a cliff. Understand, please, that it feels like we had a broken leg, went through the MRI, the doc lost the data & so now we're having our leg poked instead.
2. Why would this shot come into SmugMug un-rotated anyway?
Is your Nikon D1X camera not able to be set for auto-rotation? When set properly, cameras put a tag in the EXIF in the file, said tag let's us automatically do the right thing.
Is your Nikon D1X camera not able to be set for auto-rotation? When set properly, cameras put a tag in the EXIF in the file, said tag let's us automatically do the right thing.
Ok, let me state again: That particular file is in the correct orientation when viewed on my computer! So something is telling my computer programs what way to turn it. I've never seen anything connected with rotation that's able to be set on this camera. I'm sure my brother, whose camera it is, would have set it that way if it was even possible. Anyway, this is off the point, because as I've stated numerous times, I've run into this same issue when using an Olympus E-500 and also a Canon Powershot. Please, we just need to stop going around in these same circles. I read this whole thread last night, and it's pretty unbearable. No matter which camera I've used, some files need to be rotated. And... my other points....esp. #4.
Ok, let me state again: That particular file is in the correct orientation when viewed on my computer! So something is telling my computer programs what way to turn it. I've never seen anything connected with rotation that's able to be set on this camera. I'm sure my brother, whose camera it is, would have set it that way if it was even possible. Anyway, this is off the point, because as I've stated numerous times, I've run into this same issue when using an Olympus E-500 and also a Canon Powershot. Please, we just need to stop going around in these same circles. I read this whole thread last night, and it's pretty unbearable. No matter which camera I've used, some files need to be rotated. And... my other points....esp. #4.
Hello Anna Lisa, I'm sorry you are so upset Here's what the file looks like when I open it in Adobe Bridge:
which means, there's no exif tag set in the file telling smart software which way to rotate the image. There's a setting in the camera that will auto-rotate. Check into that and see if your camera can be set that way. Same for your Olympus. Standing by
which means, there's no exif tag set in the file telling smart software which way to rotate the image. There's a setting in the camera that will auto-rotate. Check into that and see if your camera can be set that way. Same for your Olympus. Standing by
Ok, look, if my camera is not set some way & didn't come out of the factory set some way, then a gazillion other people's cameras are going to have the same issue. My computer folder and Irfanview know how the file should be set. Moreover, could we just really and truly get down to business working on the main point here, which is that some files over-rotate? No matter what the camera thinks, or tells Smug, if I have told the photo to rotate one turn, it shouldn't rotate two turns. Way, way back in this thread and back in time, the Smug sorcerers were said to be on this issue. I think we can all agree that it's going to take the kind of testing that we all said it's going to take, not this one-photo back & forth stuff. Seriously. I just need answers to #4, and also haven't heard any results of your own test.
Please realize that neither of the cameras that I've mostly used are my own. There's only so much I'm going to change in their settings. The Olympus is a work camera and I definitely can't mess with whatever base settings they have. I don't even have that camera here. Besides, all of this is off the point. I shouldn't have even mentioned it. No matter how a photo comes into a gallery, it should rotate 90 degrees clockwise if I tell it to. Simple as that, right?
Comments
Anna Lisa, my comment had -nothing- to do with rotating images issue and everything to do with a whole other thread that Samir posted about a hidden image becoming unhidden. I'm sorry for the confusion.
We're paying full and complete attention to this thread, and what you and others are posting here. And we want to get to the bottom of it.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
We have, and we still are investigating, Anna Lisa. The issue is this is not reprducible 100% of the time. When it is, we will be able to fix it.
If you have open questions needing answering, I want to make sure they get answered, thanks - please post them - and if you could be as concise as possible, with examples/links that'd be great.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
We never, ever believe this and I try to take great pains to make sure every issue, no matter how small or big, gets acknowledged. We want to fix everything, and we try very hard to do so. Sometimes, some things take longer than others, and I wish that weren't so. Thanks for so passionately posting about this, Anna Lisa.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
You know when I posted a few weeks back about "Recent Photos" not working correctly? I remember thinking, hmmm, this hasn't been working for at least a couple weeks. I wonder why I'm not hearing about it. Maybe it's me. I don't wanna say something & hear, "no one else is having this problem". So I waited. I'd check it now & then & never saw recent photos, just copies and moves. Finally I reported it. Still never heard that anyone else noticed the issue, but maybe people contacted "help", I wouldn't know. Even then, it took awhile before I got anyone convinced it really wasn't working at all. I took time to explain the details. Eventually, it got bugged. It's still not fixed, but at least someone heard it. A lot of people simply don't know, don't notice, or don't say when something's not right. I can see why they don't say. The process is just too clunky. You too often end up just feeling like a PITA for trying to report it, like there's a lot of doubt anything could be happening.
On the"Recent Photos" thing, it seems all it would have taken was for a few of the heroes here to check their own sites, and they'd have immediately seen it wasn't working. No one really needed me to go into all kinds of detail to see something so simple & so obvious. So I just don't really get that process... why it's gotta be so clunky for customers when so many Smug heroes have their own sites and could just simply check out a bug.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Please write our Support Heroes, ATTN: Doc, with details on the "funkiness" so we can try to reproduce, and add more info to this difficult situation, Samir.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
A month later, just wondering the status again. Just ran into an image that did a 180 when it should've been 90 when working on a gallery. Whatever is broken still is. :cry
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Precise, direct link to the image? And, we may need the original image, too.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I understand the need to have precise information to evaluate what may be going on, but it's already all there and Sean has it. There's nothing more I can give that hasn't already been given. I'm just wondering where we are on the whole thing because the problem is still there.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
So here it is: When I've first uploaded a batch of photos to a gallery, I've often immediately gone in & done 2 things. I first arrange in chronological order-- takes me about a minute. Then I see which photos need rotating Left right away-- there are almost always a few that need it. So I select them & hit "rotate" & typically go on to something else such as captioning, etc. Now here's my question: Is it "safe" to assume that any photos which have arrived in the gallery not rotated correctly are not going to change on their own? In other words, I'm not jumping the gun on them by going right in & rotating them, right? I mean, do they ever change (right themselves) after arriving in a gallery, or do they always stay in the position they've landed in?
I'm asking this because of one possibility I thought about after we'd gone 'round & 'round on this topic ad nauseam. I wondered if I (or Samir, or anyone) have sometimes gone & rotated a photo which was eventually going to rotate on its own anyway. Obviously, if we did that & then it rotated itself as well, it would probably go one turn too far. I'm praying that someone knows the answer to this w/o a doubt, because I'm about to have my sister do some wedding uploading & it would be great to know this rather than doing a bunch of guesswork. Thank you!
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
We'll rotate immediately any file that has the proper exif rotation tag built into it.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
And now that I think about it, back in the day after watermarking was introduced, it had similar issues of not watermarking like the rotate tool of not rotating. You had to go back and watermark a couple of times before it 'stuck' on some images. There's probably some codebase relation between the two functions that may be at the root of it. I don't know if watermarking still has issues, but if it does, that's probably where the issue comes from.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Awhile later I noticed it had rotated 90 degrees too far, i.e. the way you see it now! All I've done with it since then is moved it to this gallery. This, as I've been trying & trying to tell Smug, is what always seems to happen when my rotations fail. They turn one turn extra. I did this a couple hours ago, so it's not that I haven't waited long enough. About 5 min. prior to rotating this one, I had rotated one or two others that needed a left rotation. I made sure to wait in-between so that there should have been no confusion for the rotation tool. I hope someone can look into this, & I hope this info. helps. I also hope I will be believed when I tell you this is typical behavior for a few of my rotations-- i.e. rotating one step too far. Why would I want to make this up?!
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Nobody thinks you're making anything up
Please yousendit to me the original file. I want to upload it and see what happens. Thanks. Put ATTN: Andy in the yousendit.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
There's no point in doing all this endless diagnosis if you guys aren't going to try to fix it. It's just wasting our time even more.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Thank you.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Ok, Andy-- I just sent the file. I'd added a note to you, but after I went to the trouble of writing it all up, it disappeared & I got the message that I had to stay under 100 characters. Sheesh, couldn't I have been stopped first? Anyway. So, Here's the very strange thing: when I went back in my original folder to look at the file, I saw that the thumb is in the correct orientation (landscape) when I look at it in thumbnail view in my folder, or even if I pull it into Irfanview. I don't have to rotate it there. Then, there are tons of others that are in the wrong orientation when viewed in my folder, but they ended up in correct orientation when uploaded to Smug. I only had to rotate 2 or 3 in a gallery of 30 or so. It's all very weird.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
I'm very sorry that yousendit.com thwarted you, Anna Lisa
I got your file. Uploaded it:
Clicked on Tools>Rotate and chose "rotate right" and clicked "rotate"
And it rotated just fine
So despite what Sean has said (I will speak with him again) I cannot replicate this issue. I will show it again to our Bug Man, Doc as well.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Sorry, it's NOT a waste of time. I promise I'm not in the practice of wasting my time or yours. We'd LOVE to find out why this is happening for you.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I'd like to see this fixed too, but frankly, I've given up. Now I just curse SM at the top of my lungs when the annoyance gets too much.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
1. Earlier in this thread, you or others (Sean, I don't remember) were able to actually tell us what you could see "under that hood" that we'd done with our files.... i.e. what had registered in the file's SmugMug history. HOwever, I haven't heard any analysis like that of my file. It's still sitting in the gallery un-rotated, just as it was when I sent you the link. So-- can you see what I did to it? Can you see that I already did to it exactly what you did here in your screen shot? (I'm just curious why I haven't heard this analysis, when it seemed all-important before)
2. Why would this shot come into SmugMug un-rotated anyway? I wonder if having a sorcerer figure out that mystery would solve the rest. This is the part that's odd to me-- don't you find it curious too? "We always do the right thing." You see the shot. Obviously it's a straight-on, landscape-oriented shot. I didn't have my camera at a weird angle-- in fact, it's fairly level with the horizon. What's more -- as I told you, when viewed in my folder on the computer, the thumb is correctly rotated! And it does not need rotation when viewed in Irfanview. Oddly though, I had a bunch of vertical shots of this same nephew in the same spot. They are all un-rotated (in the wrong orientation) when viewed in my computer folder. Yet, they came into SmugMug correctly rotated & needed no help from me. This is one thing I'm wondering: Does something in the rotation programming sometimes recognize that this is a portrait & want it to stay vertical even though it's a landscape-oriented portrait? I don't think that addresses the kind of shots Samir is taking though.
3. Yes, I see this did not happen to you this time, Andy. But we've already said again & again that it happens intermittently & unpredicably (so far). It happened a bunch of times in December, but I just didn't have the time to go through all this detail for you with each problematic file-- it takes time, clearly. I can try to report each file for awhile, but I can't replicate steps each time because the steps are the same: Rotate file one direction. Return to gallery. File turns too far.... sometimes.
4. We still haven't heard what has happened to all the research & testing that Sean did with Samir. This is frustrating. It should be obvious why Samir is saying the current mode of testing is a waste of time.... for heaven's sakes, he went to a lot of time & energy & generated a lot of data with someone who was evidently looking at it from a much deeper angle, and now... nothing. No word about it from SmugMug, no follow-through with actual results... just a much less scientific test, and no reference to all the work that's come before. You really can't get on people's case for getting upset when they've put in so much time to try to help & then it all just drops off a cliff. Understand, please, that it feels like we had a broken leg, went through the MRI, the doc lost the data & so now we're having our leg poked instead.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Is your Nikon D1X camera not able to be set for auto-rotation? When set properly, cameras put a tag in the EXIF in the file, said tag let's us automatically do the right thing.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Hello Anna Lisa, I'm sorry you are so upset
https://img.skitch.com/20110128-c8p6429nhmsbu98m9u3dyp8ucq.jpg
which means, there's no exif tag set in the file telling smart software which way to rotate the image. There's a setting in the camera that will auto-rotate. Check into that and see if your camera can be set that way. Same for your Olympus. Standing by
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Please realize that neither of the cameras that I've mostly used are my own. There's only so much I'm going to change in their settings. The Olympus is a work camera and I definitely can't mess with whatever base settings they have. I don't even have that camera here. Besides, all of this is off the point. I shouldn't have even mentioned it. No matter how a photo comes into a gallery, it should rotate 90 degrees clockwise if I tell it to. Simple as that, right?
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com