Oh no! You took away my thumbnails for Facebook!!! :::banging head::: [Sitemap]

Tecnicole

Aug-19-2010, 10:56 PM

As you can see in the image from my previous thread:
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=173817 (http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=173817&highlight=facebook)

When linking to a gallery on facebook, I used to be able to choose a thumbnail from all the photos on my page.

Now, in the same (thumbnail style) gallery if I try to link to the gallery, it gives me a choice of only 5 photos - NONE of which are photos in the gallery.
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/9673/fbfailm.jpg

Additionally, it appears as if in the SmugMug style gallery, you have a choice of more photos than Thumbnail style, but not as many photos as before.

Tecnicole

Aug-21-2010, 02:55 PM

Can someone please address this for me? Is it possible to put it back the way it was?

docwalker

Aug-23-2010, 03:30 AM

Hi Nicole, We are looking into it. Thanks for letting us know it is happening.

scotticus

Aug-23-2010, 09:46 AM

Tecnicole, can I see the gallery URL you were having problems with? (PM is fine if you don't want to post it here)

Thanks!
Scott.

As you can see in the image from my previous thread:
http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=173817 (http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=173817&highlight=facebook)

When linking to a gallery on facebook, I used to be able to choose a thumbnail from all the photos on my page.

Now, in the same (thumbnail style) gallery if I try to link to the gallery, it gives me a choice of only 5 photos - NONE of which are photos in the gallery.
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/9673/fbfailm.jpg

Additionally, it appears as if in the SmugMug style gallery, you have a choice of more photos than Thumbnail style, but not as many photos as before.

Tecnicole

Aug-23-2010, 04:17 PM

Either one of the thumbnail style galleries at:
http://photos.humansafterall.com/

(The first two galleries)

scotticus

Aug-24-2010, 07:11 AM

I'll see what we can do about this. The issue is that we have no control over what facebook thinks are important images on the page. Right now the 5 images it's pulling are from your customization and obviously aren't what you want.

Tecnicole

Aug-24-2010, 07:19 AM

Hmmm....well it was working before. Something must have changed to cause the photos to stop feeding through properly. Also, it seems to work in other gallery styles so it must be something in the thumbnail style gallery.

This is what someone else wrote to me, maybe this helps:

"This happens probably because the pictures are displaying from a java script.
You can see the Thumbnail's option Facebook gives you are only pictures you have on your html code. "

Tecnicole

Aug-24-2010, 03:58 PM

I did some research on my phone earlier, but I was able to find out that the Facebook developer's area does claim that people have control over how Facebook "reads" their page. Evidently, the metadata and thumbnails are elements that can be controlled.

scotticus

Aug-24-2010, 04:10 PM

Yeah, you can specify one image via meta tags, but it disables being able to cycle between images... When we tried that everyone asked us to un-try it almost instantly.

Tecnicole

Aug-24-2010, 04:17 PM

Well the ability to cycle through images in the thumbnail gallery style is non-existent right now.

I would think that if you had it right at one point, it works in other gallery styles, and facebook does allow developer's to code what facebook does and does not see, that there should be a way to resolve this issue, no?

scotticus

Aug-24-2010, 04:22 PM

Yes, we are actively looking into it. It typically takes facebook several days to respond to support inquiries, but I will update this thread as soon as I'm able to work something out with them.

Tecnicole

Aug-24-2010, 06:02 PM

Thank you so much.

I know from reading through other threads on here that control over the Facebook link is something that is important to me and other users as well.

The visual aspect on Facebook plays a huge role in if someone clicks through or not.

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 11:22 AM

So the problem seems to be right click protection in the gallery. If you disable it, and then try the link in facebook it should work. Or at least that's what I'm seeing in my galleries.

Allen

Aug-26-2010, 11:44 AM

So the problem seems to be right click protection in the gallery. If you disable it, and then try the link in facebook it should work. Or at least that's what I'm seeing in my galleries.
Seeing the same here. On FB I type something in share and clicked link icon.
Pasted gallery link in for two galleries, one with right click on and one off.
Only the one with right click off did the thumbnail selection show, although it
only gave a me choice of 17 out of 37.

I'm thinking "right click protection" on for personal/hobby type sites is a pita
so might toggle it off everywhere. This will allow the dummies to steal my
photos like everyone else. :D

Tecnicole

Aug-26-2010, 05:32 PM

So the problem seems to be right click protection in the gallery. If you disable it, and then try the link in facebook it should work. Or at least that's what I'm seeing in my galleries.

Damn! You got me all excited that would be a simple fix!

However, still the same problem.

Go to this gallery and/or try to post this link on Facebook and it is still the same five thumbnails that aren't photos in the gallery.

http://photos.humansafterall.com/Nightlife/SitePremiere/11593044_dHaEX#816970811_BkRZh-A-LB

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 05:36 PM

Hmmm, that seems to have fixed it everywhere else, so I'm guessing something in your customization is breaking it now. Let me see if I can duplicate....

Tecnicole

Aug-26-2010, 05:43 PM

Hmmm, that seems to have fixed it everywhere else, so I'm guessing something in your customization is breaking it now. Let me see if I can duplicate....

I think you are wrong. Probably something else.

I have a gallery in SmugMug style without the customizations. I just took off the password and made it public to test it. When I tried to post the link on Facebook it had NO thumbnail options at all.

Here is the gallery link (I put the password back and made it unlisted but let me know if you need me to change it for you)
http://photos.humansafterall.com/Nightlife/Crosstown-Rebels-Get-Lost/11822964_nnNoJ#835652986_J2i7A

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 05:49 PM

Did you also disable right click protection in it? I just added your customizations into my site, and the thumbnails stopped working... I'm not seeing yet what's breaking it, but something is...

I think you are wrong. Probably something else.

I have a gallery in SmugMug style without the customizations. I just took off the password and made it public to test it. When I tried to post the link on Facebook it had NO thumbnail options at all.

Here is the gallery link (I put the password back and made it unlisted but let me know if you need me to change it for you)
http://photos.humansafterall.com/Nightlife/Crosstown-Rebels-Get-Lost/11822964_nnNoJ#835652986_J2i7A

Tecnicole

Aug-26-2010, 05:53 PM

I didn't the first time, but I just did it again.

This time I took off the password, made it public, disabled right click....

still no thumbnail option at all

Did you also disable right click protection in it? I just added your customizations into my site, and the thumbnails stopped working... I'm not seeing yet what's breaking it, but something is...

pmbpro

Aug-26-2010, 06:08 PM

Sorry to jump in this thread. I was going to post about this, but this thread appears to address the same problem I'd been having. I'd been posting my website home page link in facebook (in Private messages I send to friends) and getting zero thumbnails ("0 of 0 Thumbnails"). Before, I used to get at least the one photo (of myself) or maybe a few others from other galleries to choose from. I always had right-click protection on when I was getting thumbnails, then it suddenly stopped working. :dunno

Anyway, I'll wait and see if there's any resolution in this thread that I can try too.

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 06:12 PM

Yeah, right click protection will definitely result in no thumbnails. Does it work when you take it off? If no, would you mind either posting a link or PMing it to me....

Sorry to jump in this thread. I was going to post about this, but this thread appears to address the same problem I'd been having. I'd been posting my website home page link in facebook (in Private messages I send to friends) and getting zero thumbnails ("0 of 0 Thumbnails"). Before, I used to get at least the one photo (of myself) or maybe a few others from other galleries to choose from. I always had right-click protection on when I was getting thumbnails, then it suddenly stopped working. :dunno

Anyway, I'll wait and see if there's any resolution in this thread that I can try too.

pmbpro

Aug-26-2010, 07:01 PM

Yeah, right click protection will definitely result in no thumbnails. Does it work when you take it off? If no, would you mind either posting a link or PMing it to me....

Hi,

No, it still doesn't work. Still no thumbnails.
Here's the link I tested it on --- this gallery currently has Right-click protect "Off".

http://www.pmbimages.com/People/Sports-and-Fitness/IDFA-Toronto-Nov-2009/

Prior to that, I'd also tried enabling "External Links", but that didn't work either, so I disabled that.

I had never changed my gallery settings (always "protected"), and it had worked fine. The thumbnails just disappeared only recently.

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 07:04 PM

That one works for me:
http://img.skitch.com/20100827-tp7hhg7kn4cqect5qgubtq7b87.jpg

pmbpro

Aug-26-2010, 07:10 PM

It's still not working for me at all. I don't understand why...

Does it work for you if I turned right-clicking off too?

jfriend

Aug-26-2010, 07:12 PM

That one works for me:
http://img.skitch.com/20100827-tp7hhg7kn4cqect5qgubtq7b87.jpgThat one works for me too, but none of mine seem to work - they don't offer any thumbnails. They all have external links on, no right-click protection, no passwords, public galleries:

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/Monterey-Whale-Watching-2010/12876397_4Yf5R#929643702_ew93G

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/San-Francisco-Marathon-2009/9204694_WV2nY#614458584_DfSLS

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/Yosemite-2009/9298108_DLCZ6#621569996_AwR5d

As an interesting clue, the generic URLs (with no customization) are all giving me thumbnails in Facebook:

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/Monterey-Whale-Watching-2010/12876397_4Yf5R#929643702_ew93G

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/San-Francisco-Marathon-2009/9204694_WV2nY#614458584_DfSLS

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/Yosemite-2009/9298108_DLCZ6#621569996_AwR5d

So what breaks the Facebook thumbnails? I have lots of customization, but in the galleries themselves, it's pretty much just a non-complicated custom header.

scotticus

Aug-26-2010, 07:15 PM

It is very strange, and sadly they don't give us any clues as to what the crawler likes/doesn't like. I'll keep trying to put the pieces together, but it's more than likely I will end up just doing a special version for the facebook bot.

pmbpro

Aug-26-2010, 07:19 PM

pmbpro

Aug-26-2010, 07:28 PM

Check this out now, using the very same sample link I posted earlier:

http://www.pmbproductions.com/tests/FB_001.jpg

THAT is the image I'm used to seeing when I just post my main URL www.pmbimages.com (http://www.pmbimages.com). That was showing up randomly a while back. Now it showed up using that other gallery link (you can see the URL posted in the window of this shot)! :dunno IT was the only choice I got, too.

ETA: Right Click protection was off, still, when I did this shot...

I've put Right Click protection back on now.

jfriend

Aug-26-2010, 08:10 PM

That one works for me too, but none of mine seem to work - they don't offer any thumbnails. They all have external links on, no right-click protection, no passwords, public galleries:

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/Monterey-Whale-Watching-2010/12876397_4Yf5R#929643702_ew93G

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/San-Francisco-Marathon-2009/9204694_WV2nY#614458584_DfSLS

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/Family/Yosemite-2009/9298108_DLCZ6#621569996_AwR5d

As an interesting clue, the generic URLs (with no customization) are all giving me thumbnails in Facebook:

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/Monterey-Whale-Watching-2010/12876397_4Yf5R#929643702_ew93G

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/San-Francisco-Marathon-2009/9204694_WV2nY#614458584_DfSLS

http://www.smugmug.com/Family/Yosemite-2009/9298108_DLCZ6#621569996_AwR5d

So what breaks the Facebook thumbnails? I have lots of customization, but in the galleries themselves, it's pretty much just a non-complicated custom header.Scott, I discovered something about my site which probably doesn't apply to the other sites. Awhile ago, I added some meta data to the Head section that was supposed to help FB. As it turns out one of those lines was ruining my ability to see images when posting a link to FB. When I removed all my meta tags, all my galleries produce thumbnails. When I put them back in, no galleries that I haven't tried before produce thumbnails, but it appears that FB may have some caching so I always ran my experiments with galleries that FB had never seen.

I narrowed it down to one particular meta tag. I can confirm that when I remove the tag:

<meta property="og:image" content="http://jfriend.smugmug.com" (http://jfriend.smugmug.com/)/>

then, all my galleries produce thumbnails. So for me, the problem appears solved. I don't see this offending meta tag in the other sites having problems so this may be a one off problem for me.

And with further testing, if I put a correct value for that property (it's supposed to point to an image URL, not a page URL) in the page then I get that and only that image for the page. So, this is what was causing my issue and is clearly NOT what I want so I'm removing that meta tag. It appears that this tag is what can be used to specify the one and only image that should represent that page. If it has an error in the image URL, then you get nothing. If it points to a valid image, you get only that image. When I remove it, I get 10 images from each gallery page.

My problem is solved for now. I don't think this is the issue for the other people in this thread as I caused my own problem by not understanding the FB meta tags properly.

RonD200

Aug-30-2010, 04:12 AM

Up until yesterday I was always able to post links from my Smugmug galleries on Facebook, either by pasting a gallery link or using the "Share on Facebook" button on my toolbar. My galleries have always had right click protection on and the thumbnail would always show up. As I said this has always worked until recently, now the only way to get a thumbnail to show up is to temporarily turn off right click protection. Not sure if something changed on Smugmug's side or Facebook.

Tecnicole

Sep-03-2010, 02:19 AM

Do my eyes deceive me, or is this working now?!

docwalker

Sep-03-2010, 04:35 AM

Nicole, we did push out some fixes last night. http://release-notes.blogs.smugmug.com/

RonD200

Sep-04-2010, 07:59 AM

Not working for me unless I turn off right click protection. It used to work with right protection turned on.

Andy

Sep-04-2010, 09:19 AM

Not working for me unless I turn off right click protection. It used to work with right protection turned on.

Specifically what is not working and specifically what gallery are you trying to post to facebook from?

RonD200

Sep-05-2010, 06:20 AM

Specifically what is not working and specifically what gallery are you trying to post to facebook from?

When I copy a link to a Smugmug gallery and paste it on Facebook I get no thumbnail if the smugmug gallery is right click protected. This happens if I copy the link from the address bar or if I use the Share on Facebook button on my toolbar. I've always had my Smugmug galleries right click protected and was, until recently, able to paste a smugmug gallery link and have the thumbnail show up from right click protected galleries. Now to get a thumbnail to show up on Facebook I first have to turn of right click protection, paste the gallery link on facebook, then go back to smugmug and turn right click protection back on. Kind of a hassle.

Be Social works fine, but this only pastes links on your facebook profile, sometime I want to paste gallery links to other pages and need to paste on link on facebook.

Thanks,
Ron

Andy

Sep-05-2010, 07:59 AM

When I copy a link to a Smugmug gallery and paste it on Facebook I get no thumbnail if the smugmug gallery is right click protected. This happens if I copy the link from the address bar or if I use the Share on Facebook button on my toolbar. I've always had my Smugmug galleries right click protected and was, until recently, able to paste a smugmug gallery link and have the thumbnail show up from right click protected galleries. Now to get a thumbnail to show up on Facebook I first have to turn of right click protection, paste the gallery link on facebook, then go back to smugmug and turn right click protection back on. Kind of a hassle.

Be Social works fine, but this only pastes links on your facebook profile, sometime I want to paste gallery links to other pages and need to paste on link on facebook.

Thanks,
Ron
Again - please - I need a gallery link :D

RonD200

Sep-05-2010, 08:14 AM

Again - please - I need a gallery link :D

It's does it with all my galleries.... I picked this one at random

http://ronskinner.smugmug.com/Nature-Preserves/Headlands-Dunes/Headlands-Dunes-Winter-2010/11175366_vy45W#783494877_YDnkP

daylightimages

Sep-06-2010, 05:11 PM

Did some testing on my own. Here's what I found.

By copying and pasting a gallery link for a gallery with right-click protection turned off, SmugMug (edit: should be Facebook) gives you a choice of 17 thumbnails (for me, one of the thumbnails is an image in my header; the rest are all from the gallery).

It gave me a choice of the first 16 photos in the gallery (plus my header image). My gallery is sorted on file name, so I tried resorting by file name in reverse order but still got the same 16 photos to choose from. Then I remembered someone said something about caching by Facebook, so I picked a new gallery, turned off RCP, sorted the gallery backwards and -- voila -- my choices were now the resorted first 16 photos (plus my header image, which always comes up as the second choice in the thumbnails).

It would seem to me if you wanted a particular image as a thumbnail, do a temporary sort so that the image appears near the beginning of the gallery, copy and paste the link, choose the thumbnail you want, and then resort your gallery back to its original order.

spi

Sep-10-2010, 10:52 PM

Hi,

I have same problem with some of my galleries (unlisted + not protected + external ok).

Btw, wouldn't it make sense to use (optionally) the featured image of the gallery becoming the FB thumbnail by using the og:image meta property (details here (http://www.wpbeginner.com/wp-themes/how-to-avoid-no-thumbnail-issue-while-sharing-post-on-facebook/)) ?

Spi

docwalker

Sep-12-2010, 03:43 AM

Spi,
Thanks for that link. That is a great bit of info. I love this part " One of the reason why you get no thumbnail, or unrelated thumbnail is because facebook’s script is not smart enough. " Sounds like what I have seen.

I will pass this along to our Social Feature programmer.

pmbpro

Sep-12-2010, 04:10 AM

Yeah, I still have the exact same problem as Ron. All of my galleries used to work when still right-click protected. I'd just tried again with this one:
http://www.pmbimages.com/Animals/Birds/Bird-Kingdom/6017783_7vpLY

Even when pasting just my main URL (http://www.pmbimages.com/) I used to always get my self-portrait (found on my "About pmb" page), or any random pic from any gallery and either way was fine before. Now it's nothing at all.

Sunnyvalejohn

Oct-01-2010, 10:24 AM

Glad to find this thread.... similar problem for me not being able to link to a gallery on FB fan page and have a thumbnail or list of thumbnails provided.

Link to gallery.
http://www.jharrisonphoto.com/Landscapes/San-Francisco-Fleet-Week-2009/9912081_bB5EZ

Confirmed external links are allowed, protected 'no' (I thought at one time it worked with protection turned off). I get no thumbnail

Especially for FB fan pages (or pages as I believe they are called now)... this is my preferred way to share images rather than uploading them straight to FB.

Thanks!
John

Andy

Oct-01-2010, 10:31 AM

John we hope to have a new implementation in the near future that will allow for this!

Tecnicole

Oct-03-2010, 02:08 AM

I thought this was resolved, but I guess not.

http://photos.humansafterall.com/

My first two galleries have the same exact settings.

However, if I post the first gallery link into Facebook:
http://photos.humansafterall.com/Nightlife-and-Music/SitePremiere/11593044_dHaEX#816970833_xNC6z
I have the option of 295 different thumbnails.

And if I post the second gallery link:
http://photos.humansafterall.com/Nightlife-and-Music/WMC2010/11710314_PrbwM#1018861546_VpgLo
I get an option of 5 thumbnails - none of which are photos from that gallery.

Also, I noticed in thumbnail style gallery it no longer pulls the description into Facebook (which is a win in my book). However, it does still pull in the gallery description with SmugMug style galleries.

I also noticed that the thumbnail choice is limited in SmugMug gallery style but at least includes some of the gallery photos.

Andy

Oct-03-2010, 05:02 AM

I thought this was resolved, but I guess not.

You do not need to keep posting about this :) We will announce changes in our release notes, promise. You'll want to subscribe to our Release Notes blog, so that you don't miss a single update from SmugMug :) http://blogs.smugmug.com/release-notes/ at the bottom, there's a link for Entries (RSS) - put that in your favorite feed reader.

We're working on some new stuff with Facebook Nicole.

Andy

Oct-03-2010, 05:04 AM

Also, I noticed in thumbnail style gallery it no longer pulls the description into Facebook (which is a win in my book).

http://img.skitch.com/20101003-893ejfnyt2kempu89jqi4yeg2d.jpg Does for me.

Tecnicole

Oct-03-2010, 05:54 AM

But that is a vast improvement over how it behaves in a SmugMug style gallery

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/2908/smugmugdescription.jpg

(or at least for me - it's just my long description)

Andy

Oct-04-2010, 03:49 AM

But that is a vast improvement over how it behaves in a SmugMug style gallery

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/2908/smugmugdescription.jpg

(or at least for me - it's just my long description)
You do know that you can simply click in that area on Facebook and replace it with anything you want, yes? Please do that :)

Tecnicole

Oct-04-2010, 05:31 PM

You do know that you can simply click in that area on Facebook and replace it with anything you want, yes? Please do that :)

I do, but not everyone knows that. I am testing these features so the people that visit my site can easily share on facebook.

The text that shows there really isn't a big deal to me, but if there was a simple code I could use to control it that would be great. But I believe you already told me that doesn't exist, so no worries.

WinsomeWorks

Oct-06-2010, 06:15 AM

With these Facebook things, please remember that it's not just the fact that we SmugMug site owners might know how to do something or post something correctly on Facebook that's important. I know & believe you're working on this, and that it'll all get figured out eventually. But it really rubs people the wrong way if you're telling them "this is the work-around & it's not that hard." Many of us are less worried that WE can post something on FB correctly, or even figure out how to do it at all... we may be much more worried that friends/guests get stuck on step #1. We gotta stop thinking of FB connections as being made only by the site owner themselves. I've seen this theme in a lot of other Smug-FB threads too... "well, you can just do it this way instead", etc. That just won't wash with the general public.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 07:56 AM

WinsomeWorks

Oct-06-2010, 01:24 PM

Anna Lisa. I was merely pointing out a feature of the Facebook website, that you can edit the description area by clicking on it. WE cannot send anything different there - FB grabs the album description, or in absence of that, the Site Meta.

Thank you. I wasn't just talking about this exact feature-- there have been others. And, well, I thought in the past it sounded like you were eventually going to be able to do something about the description problem? But now it sounds like you're saying that SmugMug can't do anything about the problem in SmugMug-style galleries? So FB is the one doing something different now, which "fixes" the description-posting problem the thumbnail-style galleries had? Ok, well, if that's the case, I hope FB can fix how it grabs the SmugMug-style galleries too.

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 02:33 PM

Anna Lisa. I was merely pointing out a feature of the Facebook website, that you can edit the description area by clicking on it. WE cannot send anything different there - FB grabs the album description, or in absence of that, the Site Meta.

Thank you.Andy, you're being a bit dramatic here. You could control what FB gets for the description if you wanted to, just like you are now controlling what FB sees so that it gets the right thumbnails. As I recall, there are also FB-specific meta data tags that can be set to to control this.

The real question for Anna Lisa I think is this. Smugmug tried to pick a reasonable default value for the description of the page in the generic metadata and that is the contents of the gallery description (if there is one). Given that the only two pieces of text that are gallery specific in that page are the name of the gallery and the gallery description and the name of the gallery is already in the title of the page, making the gallery description be the "description" of the page seems pretty reasonable. If you have a better suggestion for what they should do as a default, please propose it. What started off this thread was that Nicole had a giant description for that gallery. That was Nicole's choice and, as it turns out, that choice doesn't work that well with FB. Given the way things are, I'd suggest that Nicole make a different choice for what to put in the description that takes into account all the things the description is used for, not just one of the things it's used for.

Meanwhile, if any of you have suggestions for how Smugmug could better handle this issue of giant gallery descriptions, please provide them (and probably file a specific feature request). I've seen a lot of complaining about the way the description shows up in FB, but no practical suggestion for how it could be done better.

The only suggestion I can think of right now is that Smugmug add a separate field to the gallery settings that is the "page description" and that is what goes in the meta data and that is what FB grabs as its description. This would work not only for FB, but also for what text shows in Google search results. Smugmug will probably resist that idea because they seem to always resist adding new configuration options on UI complication grounds. My response has always been that they need a two level UI for gallery settings so there are beginning things and advanced things and beginners don't have to see advanced things until they choose to. This would obviously be an advanced thing.

As a work-around, it's possible to put the FB/Google text into the gallery description and then use JS to change the gallery description to what you want to show for page display. But, that's obviously a hassle and a bit of a maintenance headache. But, it is doable if someone is feeling desperate to solve this.

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 03:11 PM

John,

What about simply adding a new field to the gallery setup page for a "brief description" set to a reasonable size limit so one does not induce the problems? This should be a very easy solution on SM ends of things. Yeah it adds to their storage overhead but hey, it's in the clouds already, right? ;)

I have been wondering if an optional verbose description along side a brief search engine friendly description would work better for a while now, not that I am even using descriptions at all right now. Too lazy I suppose. Anyway, SM could then point these other services to the summary description when needed. Perhaps even allow the user to decide on a gallery by gallery basis which description field to actually use as the page's main description.

I have actually used this method for product records in databases...it gives nice control for different venues or situations. I don't see why it would not be untenable for SM here. Then again, if not many users are using long verbose descriptions then, well it's maybe a different situation. Still I would love to have a field to use which is specifically for good SEO blurb along with being very friendly for places like FB.

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 03:13 PM

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 03:21 PM

That's what I suggested in my fourth paragraph of previous post.

hahahaha...d'oh!! sorry I missed that part, but yes then I completely agree that seems to sensible thing for SM to do...i don't feel the current data works for the newly added services so changes need to be made rather than using a sledge hammer to make it work sort-of...

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 03:25 PM

hahahaha...d'oh!! sorry I missed that part, but yes then I completely agree that seems to sensible thing for SM to do...i don't feel the current data works for the newly added services so changes need to be made rather than using a sledge hammer to make it work sort-of...Yeah, Smugmug needs to remember this lesson. Every time, they try to use an existing display field for some other purpose, it never really works very well.

For a long time in their history, they used the text you put in your bio as the meta description for your site (what Google shows in the search results). After years of customer unhappiness and many tries at work-arounds, they finally relented and added a dedicated field in the advanced customization so one could set this field explicitly.

This is another example of the same thing. They're trying to use the gallery description display field for a different meta data purpose. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. When it does not, there is no easy work-around. A separate field would let the advanced users make it just the way they want it (like you would do if you had your own web site and controlled your own page content).

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 04:20 PM

Yeah, Smugmug needs to remember this lesson. Every time, they try to use an existing display field for some other purpose, it never really works very well.

For a long time in their history, they used the text you put in your bio as the meta description for your site (what Google shows in the search results). After years of customer unhappiness and many tries at work-arounds, they finally relented and added a dedicated field in the advanced customization so one could set this field explicitly.

This is another example of the same thing. They're trying to use the gallery description display field for a different meta data purpose. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. When it does not, there is no easy work-around. A separate field would let the advanced users make it just the way they want it (like you would do if you had your own web site and controlled your own page content).

John,

Wow and thanks for the deeper history about these issues. I find it a pretty big let down to know history keeps repeating itself. That the same type of issues happen with every new "feature" added. I feel even more like a beta tester than ever before. If I, who has been out of the serious development game, perhaps since many of the current staff was in diapers, can see the issue but they can't or, perhaps, won't, is discouraging.

I do appreciate your detailed observations. You helped me a great deal.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 04:26 PM

A separate field would let the advanced users make it just the way they want it (like you would do if you had your own web site and controlled your own page content).

We have one. It's in site meta. If no gallery description, we'll use that. What am I missing, John?

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 04:28 PM

I find it a pretty big let down

I'm sorry you feel this way! You haven't filled in your site meta, so if you have no gallery description, you get SmugMug default stuff.

http://img.skitch.com/20101007-e4a2b2w5nirwne9su1w2xd8rib.jpg

If you fill that out, you'll be way better off, FB, and SEO wise! More: http://smugmug.com/help/search-engines

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 05:00 PM

We have one. It's in site meta. If no gallery description, we'll use that. What am I missing, John?What you're missing is that if there is a gallery description that is carefully crafted to display what you want to display in your gallery, then there is no way to separately control what FB and Google display as the summary of the gallery. If one has their own web page, these can be separately controlled to optimize the web experience for that page.

Same reason it didn't work to automatically grab data from the bio for the site meta description, it doesn't always work to automatically grab data from the visible gallery description for gallery meta description - they are slightly different functions and using one piece of data for both will not always give an optimized experience.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 05:03 PM

What you're missing is that if there is a gallery description that is carefully crafted to display what you want to display in your gallery, then there is no way to separately control what FB and Google display as the summary of the gallery. If one has their own web page, these can be separately controlled to optimize the web experience for that page.

Same reason it didn't work to automatically grab data from the bio for the site meta description, it doesn't always work to automatically grab data from the visible gallery description for gallery meta description - they are slightly different functions and using one piece of data for both will not always give an optimized experience.
Don't think we have control over that, John. So we give a choice :)

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 05:11 PM

Don't think we have control over that, John. So we give a choice :)You could control it if you wanted to as I described in an earlier post.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 05:13 PM

You could control it if you wanted to as I described in an earlier post.
Sorry - could you re-link that right here? Thanks.

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 05:19 PM

Sorry - could you re-link that right here? Thanks.Post #53 in this thread.

Plus, I believe there are also specific meta tags that can be set to specify what FB shows in the various fields for a link so you could even target FB separately from other uses of the meta tag. But, just letting site owners sett the gallery meta description differently from the visible gallery description would probably solve the issue.

Here's an example. I have a gallery where I'm offering free downloads for personal, non-commercial use. I use the gallery description to explain the terms of the free downloads in the gallery view. But, I don't want all this verbage showing in either the FB description of the Google search result description. In those places, I want a short description of what's in the gallery. Right now, I have no way to solve that problem because you're using one field for both uses (visible display and FB description) so whatever goes in one gets automatically stuck in the other even though they are completely different things.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 05:45 PM

But, it is doable if someone is feeling desperate to solve this.
Yes, the real question is how to do this for the few that need/want to change it (from time to time even) without complicating our UI?

jfriend

Oct-06-2010, 05:50 PM

Yes, the real question is how to do this for the few that need/want to change it (from time to time even) without complicating our UI?You guys really need to go for a two level UI with beginner things in the default display and more advanced things available optionally for those who want them, but not not in the way for those who don't care. In the specific case of the gallery settings, there are lots of ways to implement it, but it could be a basic/advanced tab. For example, those sharpening settings sure don't belong on the basic page, but the max display size does.

Separating out basic from advanced features is used by many products for this very reason, both on the web and in traditional software - there's no need to invent something new, just find the existing technique that feels right for your situation.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 05:51 PM

You guys really need to go for a two level UI with beginner things in the default display and more advanced things available optionally for those who want them, but not not in the way for those who don't care. In the specific case of the gallery settings, there are lots of ways to implement it, but it could be a basic/advanced tab. For example, those sharpening settings sure don't belong on the basic page, but the max display size does.

Separating out basic from advanced features is used by many products for this very reason, both on the web and in traditional software - there's no need to invent something new, just find the existing technique that feels right for your situation.
Would LOVE to get there :D Thanks ever so much, John!

WinsomeWorks

Oct-06-2010, 06:09 PM

I'm sorry-- I had a brain glitch and was actually thinking about the other FB-share-thing... the thing where the whole ugly link ends up being the main feature of the post. (In my defense, there's too many share-"things"-- FB problems I mean, and too many ways to share, with none of them doing what you really want them to do imho, and that's why I get confused about all the different stuff going on) I can't even remember which one is going to give me the thumbs & which is not & with what gallery settings, and which is going to give me the whole ugly link, etc. Consequently, I've hardly used the share stuff. It's a bummer.

As far as the gallery description-- yes, for me it would sure help if the description were at the very least limited to a long sentence or so, with a ... just to show it continues, if it's a long one. I do have a few galleries with very long descriptions. They are all for good reason, as there's no other publicly visible place to put some needed info. for visitors. But yes, for FB sharing these are of little to no use, so a limit would help a lot. That said, John's proposal would probably be more ideal for pros, with separate places to put what gets shared.

I also think it's been hard for me and a lot of folks to sort out the distinctions between FB "like" and FB "share". I just wish it were all simpler. I'd be so happy w/ one good way to share/post each page... one that works handsomely. You get a gallery title (or photo title instead if you choose) which is the link, you choose a thumb, you decide what you want for description. You can share a photo, a gallery, or a category. The buttons are in decent places. I know, I know... some of this is FB's problem... just sayin', in an ideal world... that's my dream.

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 06:16 PM

I can't even remember which one is going to give me the thumbs

Go paste a gallery link into your status and see what we fixed up for you. Just a few days ago.

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 06:37 PM

Yes, the real question is how to do this for the few that need/want to change it (from time to time even) without complicating our UI?

these really are the things which come with adding the stuff like FB before fully appreciating the ramifications. First there was the problem of the button itself causing issues for many users due to the cross site scripting and whatever else was happening. Now we have what should have been a full and obvious thing for the dev and design teams to be aware of right up front. Heck, Andy crack that whip...I am in a fog most of the time these days thanks to needed medication for my RA and another far more significant issue and I saw it right off once reading the issue.

This is one of the biggest headaches of all these, well, really all they are is a fancy wrapper for metrics tracking presented in a fashion to seem like a happy-fun time. But you know like anyone else the folks at FB only care about the metrics info they can sell. They really do not care what their needs to to other sites...which puts a company like SM or even a small mom'n'pop website w/o the resources to really dig into things.

I do bet though it was different at first but slowly and surely these "features" will begin to take over your business. Plus they present a constantly moving target for your dev and UI design folks...I mean those buttons are butt arse fugly...

I say every service needs it's own set of advanced fields...really, just jump head of them letting users decide what works for our code and needs. Obviously these marketing things are important, maybe even more so for the less technically inclined who can't hire an SEO consultant. But they need to be handled in a fashion to protect us users as much as possible.

Of course this is just off the top of my head being old and broke and broken...thanks for that...yeah I might as well blame SM for being old and broken... :p

Seriously though I don't envy the complexity of implications these "services" represent to your user trust & safety folks either. Remember, exposing a site to them will always have liability implications. I don't care but others might...just let my images work as I need them...oooohhhhh wait... :rofl

I agree that perhaps it's time to redesign the control panel part of things as well as the gallery setup page(s)...gee things are starting to look as complicated as eBay pages these days and their 10MB of metrics/3rd party served script code alone...and those are SMALL pages. Welcome to the modern web...have fun!

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 06:39 PM

Post #53 in this thread.

Plus, I believe there are also specific meta tags that can be set to specify what FB shows in the various fields for a link so you could even target FB separately from other uses of the meta tag. But, just letting site owners sett the gallery meta description differently from the visible gallery description would probably solve the issue.

Here's an example. I have a gallery where I'm offering free downloads for personal, non-commercial use. I use the gallery description to explain the terms of the free downloads in the gallery view. But, I don't want all this verbage showing in either the FB description of the Google search result description. In those places, I want a short description of what's in the gallery. Right now, I have no way to solve that problem because you're using one field for both uses (visible display and FB description) so whatever goes in one gets automatically stuck in the other even though they are completely different things.

+6*10^23 agree

Andy

Oct-06-2010, 07:08 PM

+6*10^23 agree

See my replies. Thanks.

WinsomeWorks

Oct-06-2010, 07:25 PM

Go paste a gallery link into your status and see what we fixed up for you. Just a few days ago. Which way? I mean, should I copy & paste the link from my gallery that I find in the address bar? Or should I go through "Share" and get a gallery link that way? Along those lines, yesterday I tried the "get a link" thing for one single image in a public gallery. I posted it on my daughter's FB wall. However, you can't click on the link it provided to see the photo... all that comes up is a blank page & the url. But if you click on the post's thumbnail itself, the photo comes up as it should. Sorry, guess this should be in a different thread. Can't bear to start yet another FB thread though. This is the photo I tried to post: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#916111796_qcUKX (it's the photo of a person in some deep tree roots)

brecklundin

Oct-06-2010, 08:02 PM

See my replies. Thanks.

I already did but hey you had a long day...so perhaps it is best left as found.

Tecnicole

Oct-07-2010, 03:06 AM

Tecnicole

Oct-07-2010, 03:08 AM

I'm sorry-- I had a brain glitch and was actually thinking about the other FB-share-thing... the thing where the whole ugly link ends up being the main feature of the post.

Go paste a gallery link into your status and see what we fixed up for you. Just a few days ago.

I think this is one in the same. Posting your gallery link into your status and not in the "link" wall publisher field = "the whole ugly link ends up being the main feature of the post"

jfriend

Oct-07-2010, 04:26 AM

It was stated in a previous post that you use the site meta if there is no gallery description.

I think the site meta is a much better choice over the gallery description in all cases!

FB description for the links should be short and sweet. There is typically a brief decription of the gallery in the title of the gallery (which will show on facebook as the clickable link) and then the site meta could be the brief text in the box that comes up on Facebook to describe where the person is clicking through to.

I have a feeling if you default to site meta rather than gallery description for this field, you would make a lot of users happy.I disagree. Using a single meta description for your entire site gives you absolutely ZERO control over it for any gallery. At least this way, you get to decide how you want to handle it. It's best if they give you a separate field for the gallery meta description, but absent that, the gallery description is better than using the same meta description for every single page on your site.

Andy

Oct-07-2010, 04:32 AM

I think this is one in the same. Posting your gallery link into your status and not in the "link" wall publisher field = "the whole ugly link ends up being the main feature of the post"

And, we will have the simple "Blue Square F" button to share links too in the future - the one you've asked for. The one requiring no app to be permissioned on FB. Stay tuned.

Andy

Oct-07-2010, 04:36 AM

It's best if they give you a separate field for the gallery meta description,

Keep in mind, this would be at the cost of: 1)more sorcery time, 2) complicating the UI for the huge, huge percentage of people that just will use (and be happy with) their gallery description, 3) more questions at our help desk, twitter, facebook, dgrin

We hear all your requests for new addons and features but sometimes we don't do them for a variety of reasons. We'll keep watching and monitoring how folks use and post to Facebook. And what's available via their APIs. We do have many more enhancements planned.

Thanks.

Andy

Oct-07-2010, 04:58 AM

If I have html code in my gallery description, does that code then show up on the FB link?

Why not try it? You don't actually have to post the link on Facebook, just use their preview function. :D But the answer is no, Shawn.

Tecnicole

Oct-07-2010, 04:58 AM

I disagree. Using a single meta description for your entire site gives you absolutely ZERO control over it for any gallery. At least this way, you get to decide how you want to handle it. It's best if they give you a separate field for the gallery meta description, but absent that, the gallery description is better than using the same meta description for every single page on your site.

I meant primarily as a "for now" option until they are able to offer something similar to your suggestion that involves some work and time on their end.

I wonder if it would be easy to give us a choice between those two options (gallery description or site meta) as a "for now" option.

All in all, the description is not a huge issue for me just a "would be nice" sort of thing.

I can imagine it must be frustrating for so many companies to have to deal with Facebook in this manner. But they've been successful in proving themselves a necessary "evil".

John, you've mentioned that Facebook has codes that allow SmugMug to control aspects of the site. Are we not able to somehow implement the code into our own customizations? If so, I wouldn't mind looking into how to do that once I have some extra time.

Very happy to hear we will soon have a clean and easy facebook share option! :barb

WinsomeWorks

Oct-07-2010, 09:59 AM

Andy, could you let me know which method I'm supposed to try in post #74 ? I'd like to try, but it wasn't clear to me what I'm supposed to try.

jfriend

Oct-07-2010, 12:03 PM

I meant primarily as a "for now" option until they are able to offer something similar to your suggestion that involves some work and time on their end.

I wonder if it would be easy to give us a choice between those two options (gallery description or site meta) as a "for now" option.

All in all, the description is not a huge issue for me just a "would be nice" sort of thing.

I can imagine it must be frustrating for so many companies to have to deal with Facebook in this manner. But they've been successful in proving themselves a necessary "evil".

John, you've mentioned that Facebook has codes that allow SmugMug to control aspects of the site. Are we not able to somehow implement the code into our own customizations? If so, I wouldn't mind looking into how to do that once I have some extra time.

Very happy to hear we will soon have a clean and easy facebook share option! :barbNo, you cannot implement the FB codes in your customization. It has to be in the page as it comes from Smugmug's server.

Andy

Oct-07-2010, 08:49 PM

I couldn't find the preview function, I do however see the link function on the left side and then the attach function. :bash

I guess it doesn't really matter now, as long as I know it won't show.
Now I have to figure out how to link to my facebook page.
Apparently I am not the only Shawn Kraus. :D
I think I just have to enter a username and then use that after the facebook url.

Just paste your link - it won't post till you hit the post button. But you can see what will be posted :)

WinsomeWorks

Oct-12-2010, 05:46 PM

Andy, could you let me know which method I'm supposed to try in post # 70 (my detailed question is in #74?) I'd like to try, but it wasn't clear to me exactly what I'm supposed to try. Bump.

Andy

Oct-13-2010, 09:06 AM

Which way? I mean, should I copy & paste the link from my gallery that I find in the address bar? Or should I go through "Share" and get a gallery link that way? Along those lines, yesterday I tried the "get a link" thing for one single image in a public gallery. I posted it on my daughter's FB wall. However, you can't click on the link it provided to see the photo... all that comes up is a blank page & the url. But if you click on the post's thumbnail itself, the photo comes up as it should. Sorry, guess this should be in a different thread. Can't bear to start yet another FB thread though. This is the photo I tried to post: http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#916111796_qcUKX (it's the photo of a person in some deep tree roots)

You can do either, Anna Lisa. Paste a gallery link, like this:
http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#268304062_UN9w4

or go and use Share>Be Social.

Up to you....

WinsomeWorks

Oct-13-2010, 07:52 PM

You can do either, Anna Lisa. Paste a gallery link, like this:
http://www.winsomeworks.com/Portfolio/AnnaLisaYoder-PhotoFavorites/6704667_LAjfv#268304062_UN9w4

or go and use Share>Be Social.

Up to you.... I only tried the copy & paste way so far-- but yes, definitely a big improvement... MUCH prettier! Thanks! I still don't like how so much of the description shows up, because in the gallery I posted, I have a longer one. I didn't notice a way to edit it when posting. However, I wasn't attentive to that til too late, so next time I'll pay better attention & try editing it since I think you said it's edit-able.

Andy

Oct-13-2010, 08:16 PM

I didn't notice a way to edit it when posting.

We covered this before :D Just click in the description on facebook, it turns yellow. Edit away.

WinsomeWorks

Oct-14-2010, 06:09 AM

We covered this before :D Just click in the description on facebook, it turns yellow. Edit away. Yeah, I know-- however, the reason it wasn't evident to me, or a light-bulb didn't go off in my head at the time, is this: when I pasted the link in, the description was only partially showing anyway. It was short like this: Blahblahblahblahblahblah... So the " ... " led me to think that's all that would show when I posted. That's why the thought to edit it did not click... probably typical of what most people would think, right? Unfortunately though, once the post goes live, it does show the entire thing. I doubt most people would even think to edit what they do not even see!

Andy

Oct-14-2010, 07:09 AM

Yeah, I know-- however, the reason it wasn't evident to me, or a light-bulb didn't go off in my head at the time, is this: when I pasted the link in, the description was only partially showing anyway. It was short like this: Blahblahblahblahblahblah... So the " ... " led me to think that's all that would show when I posted. That's why the thought to edit it did not click... probably typical of what most people would think, right? Unfortunately though, once the post goes live, it does show the entire thing. I doubt most people would even think to edit what they do not even see!
Hi Anna Lisa, I'm sorry I can't control Facebook's UI :) Please just click in there and edit to your heart's content.