SmugMug Bug Reporting

[Andy]

Did you find a bug? Ooops, tell us all about it!

Please reply to this thread and tell us what exactly is (not) happening. What operating system and browser are you using? Are you logged in or logged out? Please give us a link to where you see the problem. Let us know everything that you feel may be relevant, as it may help us to track down the problem.


Just for reference,
Old Bug Reporting threads on Dgrin:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=40326
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=23483

[BeachBill]

Amdy, I tried posting a bug, but it said I'm not authorized. It appears we need an account to post? I even tried my smugmug login but it didn't work.

[Andy]

Amdy, I tried posting a bug, but it said I'm not authorized. It appears we need an account to post? I even tried my smugmug login but it didn't work.
http://smugmug.jot.com/WikiHome/WikiAccount

[BeachBill]

Thanks.

[tsk1979]

I see them on main page, but when I go into a gallery, no pics there :(
eg:http://tanveer.smugmug.com/gallery/2053564

[devbobo]

I see them on main page, but when I go into a gallery, no pics there :(
eg:http://tanveer.smugmug.com/gallery/2053564

I see the photos fine, clear your browser cache (and cookies if needed)

[tsk1979]

I see the photos fine, clear your browser cache (and cookies if needed)
thanks, clearing cookies helped!
First time this happened to me so the panic but smugmug support rocks as always :clap:clap

[bham]

Bulk uploader reporting incorrect number of images uploaded. Happened twice in about a two minute period for 2 different galleries. One gallery I uploaded 4 images, and it said 2 images uploaded, but I checked the gallery and all 4 uploaded. In another gallery I uploaded 1 photo, and it reported that it didn't receive any photos, yet I check the gallery and the photo is there.

I use star explorer alot, but this was a problem like 6 months ago, then was reported and fixed. It seems its back again.

[Andy]

Bulk uploader reporting incorrect number of images uploaded. Happened twice in about a two minute period for 2 different galleries. One gallery I uploaded 4 images, and it said 2 images uploaded, but I checked the gallery and all 4 uploaded. In another gallery I uploaded 1 photo, and it reported that it didn't receive any photos, yet I check the gallery and the photo is there.

I use star explorer alot, but this was a problem like 6 months ago, then was reported and fixed. It seems its back again.so, to be clear, you were uploading with StarExplorer? Pls advise, thanks :D

[bham]

Andy, no I was using the bulk uploader on smugmug. Just mentioned that I don't use the bulk uploader much anymore since I have star explorer. Stated that I use star explorer because maybe the issue has been around for a while and nobody has reported or noticed it.

[Andy]

Andy, no I was using the bulk uploader on smugmug. Just mentioned that I don't use the bulk uploader much anymore since I have star explorer. Stated that I use star explorer because maybe the issue has been around for a while and nobody has reported or noticed it.
Thanks, I'll make sure Ben sees this!

[bham]

Thanks, I'll make sure Ben sees this!

This bug was happening like 6 months ago and I pointed it out then and it got fixed. Maybe with some upgrades the fix got unfixed.

[Mac Write]

Seems there is a bug in the co-branding footer. I have successfully removed it even though there is the displa:block hard coded.

You can see it here http://macwrite.smugmug.com Don't worry I will put it back in my footer (so I can remove the | and just have a clean powered by Smugmug Portions © etc etc. I haven't replaced it yet to display the bug).

The footer code needs to be redesigned so that everything can be stripped (login, shopping cart, |, etc) so that we are only left with the Power by Smugmug ©2006 blah blah blah.

To save on page loading, you should have an option for level of co-branding footer in the customizing area from basic (just portions powered by Smugmug ©2006 Smugmug) to full blown etc. This would help with page loading file size (since display:none still loads the content) and allow for the cleaning possible look for pages.

Edit: I also noticed to extra </span></span> before the cobranding footer closing tag that aren't part of any span.

[Andy]

Seems there is a bug in the co-branding footer. I have successfully removed it even though there is the displa:block hard coded.

You can see it here http://macwrite.smugmug.com Don't worry I will put it back in my footer (so I can remove the | and just have a clean powered by Smugmug Portions © etc etc. I haven't replaced it yet to display the bug).

The footer code needs to be redesigned so that everything can be stripped (login, shopping cart, |, etc) so that we are only left with the Power by Smugmug ©2006 blah blah blah.

To save on page loading, you should have an option for level of co-branding footer in the customizing area from basic (just portions powered by Smugmug ©2006 Smugmug) to full blown etc. This would help with page loading file size (since display:none still loads the content) and allow for the cleaning possible look for pages.

Edit: I also noticed to extra </span></span> before the cobranding footer closing tag that aren't part of any span.
Yes, I'll make sure JT sees this.
Thanks.

[thebigsky]

I keep getting the following error when trying to use the Mac Uploader:-

Your system is not recent enough to log into the smugmug service securely. You can choose to continue insecurely or quit.

If I click on continue insecurely, the log in dialogue doesn't work, it just does nothing.

Charlie

System - Mac Pro, latest install of OS-X

[Andy]

I keep getting the following error when trying to use the Mac Uploader:-

Your system is not recent enough to log into the smugmug service securely. You can choose to continue insecurely or quit.

If I click on continue insecurely, the log in dialogue doesn't work, it just does nothing.

Charlie

System - Mac Pro, latest install of OS-X
Yeah, known bug. Email me at the help desk I have some thing for you :)

[cedricd]

I'm running IE 7 on Vista (the final build, not a Beta) and noticed that various UI elements on smugmug pages aren't getting displayed.
When I hover over an image I don't see the thumbs up / thumbs down icon to rate the photo
I tried created a new account for a family member as a gift. I entered all their info on the page and then clicked the 'Share the Smug' button. It didn't work - only reloaded the same page. I tried it on Firefox and got a bright red error message stating that SmugMug couldn't charge my credit card (turns out the card smugmug had on file for me was old). On IE 7 I had no idea what the error was. I didn't get a screenshot of this.
On logging on to a new account you first see a page prompting you to create a gallery. The 'create gallery' button is missing from that page. Screenshot here: http://cedricdussud.smugmug.com/gallery/2017213/1/110881181/Original

[Andy]

I'm running IE 7 on Vista (the final build, not a Beta) and noticed that various UI elements on smugmug pages aren't getting displayed.
When I hover over an image I don't see the thumbs up / thumbs down icon to rate the photo
I tried created a new account for a family member as a gift. I entered all their info on the page and then clicked the 'Share the Smug' button. It didn't work - only reloaded the same page. I tried it on Firefox and got a bright red error message stating that SmugMug couldn't charge my credit card (turns out the card smugmug had on file for me was old). On IE 7 I had no idea what the error was. I didn't get a screenshot of this.
On logging on to a new account you first see a page prompting you to create a gallery. The 'create gallery' button is missing from that page. Screenshot here: http://cedricdussud.smugmug.com/gallery/2017213/1/110881181/Original
thanks - we're aware of this and the engineers are working on it {JT}

[westis]

Seems like foreign characters (like åäö) still don't work in keywords, in the beta version. They are simply removed, so Växjö becomes Vxj.

[Andy]

Seems like foreign characters (like åäö) still don't work in keywords, in the beta version. They are simply removed, so Växjö becomes Vxj.
It's a very difficult problem, for our engineers. I'll see if I can get JT to comment on the reasoning. Not a bug, right now, as it's designed that way. Sorry for the hassle.

[westis]

It's a very difficult problem, for our engineers. I'll see if I can get JT to comment on the reasoning. Not a bug, right now, as it's designed that way. Sorry for the hassle.

Thanks for the quick reply! Hope you'll be able to sort it, as also foreign characters in captions get distorted when photos are uploaded. Maybe a feature request to have that fixed, rather than a bug report?

[Andy]

Seems like foreign characters (like åäö) still don't work in keywords, in the beta version. They are simply removed, so Växjö becomes Vxj.

This from our CEO and Chief Geek: "Our data model doesn't support them (those tables are Latin-1, not UTF-8, UTF-16, or Unicode), and we really have no way of telling what's punctuation and what's not with foreign languages. "

I wish I had a better answer for you, sorry.

[westis]

This from our CEO and Chief Geek: "Our data model doesn't support them (those tables are Latin-1, not UTF-8, UTF-16, or Unicode), and we really have no way of telling what's punctuation and what's not with foreign languages. "

I wish I had a better answer for you, sorry.

Hmm, that doesn't sound good... How come it works fine with sites like Zenfolio? Is there a way to convert the tags to UTF-8 before uploading?

The thing is, it is readible when editing a tag in SmugMug, but apparently it is filtered out somehow with the filter that also filters out numbers etc. Can there be an option to not use the pre-defined filter?

[Zmom]

'Fraid I'm lost - I went to the wiki but couldn't find the Bug reporting site.

Thanks.

[ivar]

'Fraid I'm lost - I went to the wiki but couldn't find the Bug reporting site.

Thanks.Hi Zmom, it's not you. You need to be registered in order to be able to see the bug-reporter, sorry.

Please give us your bug here for now, thanks :thumb

[Andy]

Bug Reporter should be available:

http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter

[ivar]

Bug Reporter should be available:

http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporterIt is now, I fixed it :D

[todosLados]

It is now, I fixed it :D

I just tried to post a bug and it reported an error:
An error occurred

Error code: InsufficientPrivileges

Additional information: not authorized to add child
Error Location/BugReporter/New Bug (http://smugmug.jot.com/_/cmd/util.showXML?locator=%5B%5D&standalone=true&styled=true&xml=%2FBugReporter%2FNew+Bug#jot-locator)
Steps I took:
- Went to Andy's BugReporter Link, which took me to the dashboard, which was empty.
- Clicked the "New" tab. Contents of the section were also empty.
- Clicked "New Full" tab. It displayed a form. Now I was getting somewhere (not that intuitive though).
- Filled out the form.
- Clicked "Submit".
- Error displayed.

Am I doing something wrong? Although I now see that my SmugMug bug I was reporting is not a bug. But if it was... :D

Cheers,
Ben

[Andy]

I just tried to post a bug and it reported an error:
An error occurred

Error code: InsufficientPrivileges

Additional information: not authorized to add child
Error Location/BugReporter/New Bug (http://smugmug.jot.com/_/cmd/util.showXML?locator=%5B%5D&standalone=true&styled=true&xml=%2FBugReporter%2FNew+Bug#jot-locator)
Steps I took:
- Went to Andy's BugReporter Link, which took me to the dashboard, which was empty.
- Clicked the "New" tab. Contents of the section were also empty.
- Clicked "New Full" tab. It displayed a form. Now I was getting somewhere (not that intuitive though).
- Filled out the form.
- Clicked "Submit".
- Error displayed.

Am I doing something wrong? Although I now see that my SmugMug bug I was reporting is not a bug. But if it was... :D

Cheers,
Benpost it here for now :deal

[nocturne1]

another small bug in beta smugmug style - if you check arrange mode, move a pic, then uncheck arrange mode, you still are able to continue arranging pics... doesn't seem to occur in old smugmug style

[ivar]

another small bug in beta smugmug style - if you check arrange mode, move a pic, then uncheck arrange mode, you still are able to continue arranging pics... doesn't seem to occur in old smugmug styleHi Nocturne, I can't reproduce this. What browser are you using?

[nocturne1]

Hi Nocturne, I can't reproduce this. What browser are you using?
Firefox 2.0.1 (both on Mac and PC). And also can do it on Safari on the Mac.

Again, here's the procedure:

1) Check arrange mode
2) Move a picture or 2
3) Uncheck arrange mode
4) Continue to move pictures...

Although...strange - I try doing it again (right after I just re-verified the problem), and can't do it....

[TnHiker]

[quote=Andy]We have a new method for you to report bugs, easier for us to track, easier for you to search. We've soft-launched our new Wiki which includes a public Bug Reporter (http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter) where you can report bugs as you find them.

The Bug Reporter page requires selection of "New Full" from the dashboard (a simple "Full" gets no response).

In the "Creating New Bug" form I posted my info and when I tried to "Save" I got this message:
Error code: InsufficientPrivileges

Additional information: not authorized to add child

I still have the original "bug" to report so I'll post it here in the forum.

Al

[ivar]

[quote=Andy]We have a new method for you to report bugs, easier for us to track, easier for you to search. We've soft-launched our new Wiki which includes a public Bug Reporter (http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter) where you can report bugs as you find them.

The Bug Reporter page requires selection of "New Full" from the dashboard (a simple "Full" gets no response).

In the "Creating New Bug" form I posted my info and when I tried to "Save" I got this message:
Error code: InsufficientPrivileges

Additional information: not authorized to add child

I still have the original "bug" to report so I'll post it here in the forum.

AlThat will be fine, right in this thread please :D

[Mike Lane]

Bug? Gripe? You decide. Use this gallery (http://mikelane.smugmug.com/gallery/2376556) to see what I'm talking about. I didn't notice this until I set the fadeInTime and fadeOutTime but if you change from photo to photo notice the vertical divider between the thumbs and the main photo. It fades right along with the photo. IMHO it should stay put while the photo fades out and then back in.

The other thing is that the flyout menu does not trigger the hover state for the image. So even though your mouse is over the image, the border will change colors when you hover over the flyout. Non good IMHO. The border color should remain the same whenever the mouse is hovering over the image dispite the flyout. :deal

:thumb

[raptorcaptor]

I would really like to have "smugmug small" back. Right now my layout is really messed up!

[digitalpins]

Something I just noticed at work..... is that my page looks different in Firefox 2.0.0.1 and Safari 1.3.2

Basically the problem is that the new page nav is not there in safari, I am not sure if this happens in the OS X 10.4's safari but since I am not at home and using my mac not sure what it looks like

At work I use OS X 10.3.9 and in
Safari 1.3.2 my page looks like this
http://digitalpins.smugmug.com/photos/124803180-M.jpg


And in Firefox 2.0.0.1 it looks like this
http://digitalpins.smugmug.com/photos/124803236-M.jpg


ANYBODY.............

[ahyuen]

New comment no longer supports double byte characters after migration. All double byte characters comes ??????

Old comment can be seen fortunately.
Pls advise.

[Mike Lane]

I would really like to have "smugmug small" back. Right now my layout is really messed up!It's not too difficult to fix. All you need to do is specify one thing for smugmug and one thing for smugmug_small. Start a new thread in the customization room for more detailed help if you need it.

[photosnappinphool]

Dear Smugmug Workers,

First the kudos, then the bugs. :D
Thank you for working to make Smugmug better. I do love my
Smugmug account and use it as younger people might use
their MySpace or blog accounts (to keep in touch with family and friends.)
Next, the quick loading picture change (within a gallery) is a nice thing.

Now for the bugs --
Today (Jan 22) I notice my galleries (clicking from the main page)
boot up much slower than the instant viewing I'm used to.
I am using a cable connection to broadband high speed Internet access.
I have tried Smugmug on my older eMac using Firefox and OS 10.3.9 as well
as my newer iMac using Safari and OS 10.4.8

Once the gallery is loaded, viewing from photo to photo is
indeed faster, but I'm thinking the lag in initial gallery boot up is not
a worthwhile trade, because the novice viewer might
think these are empty galleries and give up during lag time.

Another observation -- before one of your last overhauls,
it was possible to imbed music from outside sources within
photo pages by entering the proper HTML code within the "edit caption" field.
After the revamp, my embedded music wouldn't play. I don't
quite understand how disabling the HTML capabilities would benefit
Smugmug operations, as the music was coming from an outside
source and not using Smugmug storage space.

Thank you for your time and continued hard work,
B. C.

[Mike Lane]

why am I getting this? I only get it when I try to go to my galleries category using my custom domain. It was working earlier, but now, not so much.

:ear

[Andy]

why am I getting this? I only get it when I try to go to my galleries category using my custom domain. It was working earlier, but now, not so much.

:ear
all fixed.

[digitalpins]

anybody using a mac and if so did you see my post on the previous page about firefox and safari looking different. Can you please see how you page or others looks in safari?

In safari I dont see that new page nav. at all but in firefox I do. Thats on my website and anybody everyones website here. By the way I am using the latest version of FIrefox here at work and safari 1.3.2

[Andy]

and safari 1.3.2

Can you update your Safari pls?

[enigmatic]

It appears that my custom URL is no longer working. If I go to http://enigmatic.smugmug.com - it all works great. but when I go to http://photo.matthewbrowning.net - or use imbedded photo's with that URL - nothing comes up. Help! :bow

[Andy]

It appears that my custom URL is no longer working. If I go to http://enigmatic.smugmug.com - it all works great. but when I go to http://photo.matthewbrowning.net - or use imbedded photo's with that URL - nothing comes up. Help! :bow
please try again, it's working fine for me?

[digitalpins]

looks like that was the problem, I am home now and safari on my desktop is the lastest version and it looks just fine. Too bad at work I cant update, the IT guys have too and they wont update the operating systems at work just yet so no new safari for me at work just yet.

thanks andy

[enigmatic]

please try again, it's working fine for me?

Very odd :dunno - now it seems to be working perfectly. Sorry for the trouble and thanks! :D

[Ryan Armbrust]

None of the "community" tags are working after the upgrade to smugmug.
Please help.

[Ryan Armbrust]

Color codes for fonts do not work any more.

[devbobo]

Ryan,

I have reported both issues to the team. Stay tuned :thumb

David

[FormerLurker]

Strange "bug" -- the page numbering has disappeared on only one of my galleries. When I use any browser and point to gallery 1149669, I see

Pageof 8

on all of my other galleries I see

Page 1 of 2

Yet when I highlight the Pageof for gallery 1149669, I see Page X of 8.....

All was working correctly prior to the "update."

armchair-traveler.smugmug.com/gallery/1149669

Thanks!

[devbobo]

Hi FormerLurker,

It's actually your customisation rather than a bug per se. I am really not a css expert...but if you have webdev on FF, remove your css and u will see it restored correctly.

I will see if i can organise some help for u.

Cheers,

David

[Allen]

Strange "bug" -- the page numbering has disappeared on only one of my galleries. When I use any browser and point to gallery 1149669, I see

Pageof 8

on all of my other galleries I see

Page 1 of 2

Yet when I highlight the Pageof for gallery 1149669, I see Page X of 8.....

All was working correctly prior to the "update."

armchair-traveler.smugmug.com/gallery/1149669

Thanks!
Great, you fixed it. I'm guessen' because I don't see and page numbers on
that gallery. It looks like an html only gallery, might want to remove the cart buttons.
AL

Hold on, your full page jsut popup, weird, I
ll look again.

Edit2:
It's in your customization, remove this and it comes back

.category_Wolfeboro .title {display:none}

Duh! I've been sitting here for a while and forgot to hit the save button. sorry
Al

[ahyuen]

New comment no longer supports double byte characters after migration. All double byte characters comes ??????

Old comment can be seen fortunately.
Pls advise.

Anyone picked up this issue? Hope it will be addressed shortly.

Thanks for your help.

[tagcaver]

The seems to be a bug with the bug reporter. When I try to enter a bug it says I'm not authorized to do so.

[devbobo]

The seems to be a bug with the bug reporter. When I try to enter a bug it says I'm not authorized to do so.

Hi tagcaver,

you need to have an account on the wiki to post bug reports. I can't quite remember how it add them, let me see what i can find.

Cheers,

David

[kwalsh]

Apologies for not using the Bug Reporter but it looked so non-functional (lots of error messages and just blank pages) I had no confidence it would do anything with my bug, so I'll report it here. BTW, I love bug tracking systems, but only if they appear to be working!!! And yes, it may in fact be working, but appearences do count!

RH Linux Enterprise 4, Firefox 1.5.0.3

Issue 1: Smugmug help page does not function properly. When you click on a subject you can never look at another one without refreshing the page. All further clicks on any green subjects does nothing. If you refresh then you get to click on one, only one, and then refresh again...

Issue 2: Another smugmug help problem. When you click a subject you don't actually see all the sub-topics. They are truncated/clipped at the bottom. For example, when I click on "Power Users" I only see the first two items, sometimes only the first one and a half). Makes it very hard to find "help" :). Interestingly if I search for the topic and then go to that topic the side-bar now shows more of the sub-topic list. And if I click on another subject I get the behaviour from issue 1.

Issue 3: I once or twice been able to get the new stylish smugmug style to not load at all. Typically this happens when I click to one gallery, it starts to load, I then click back quickly and then click into a new gallery. Said new gallery never loads any images, never shows the little wheel. If I try a refresh nothing happens. If I hit back again, wait a moment and then click to the gallery it does load. It is not easy for me to reproduce but it does occur occasionally.

Oh, and BTW, the new smugmug style is very cool! Good work!

Ken

[photogmomma]

I've searched around and can't find this bug listed anywhere so I hope it's not a dupe...

Navigate to any of my galleries - pro or personal - using IE 7
In SmugMug style, place cursor over the main image
On the flyout that shows up for copying, etc, the background only comes out halfway.Because it happens on both my sites, I suspect it's not me, but who knows.

My info:

Site to verify: http://www.tippiepics.com/gallery/2082559#107341890
IE 7.0.5730.11 (it appears that it only occurs here.)
Works fine in FireFoxThanks!
Holler if you need more info.

[irenelucier]

My problem is just the oposite of that reported here (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=52162).

At first I could add multiple images to my cart in FireFox but IE7 generated the message: "We're sorry, the owners of these photos have not enabled printing.:

Then I remembered to log out in Firefox :rolleyes and got the same error. I tried I tried rebooting, clearing cookies, cache, pretty much every browser temp file.

This occurred here:
http://www.irenelucier.com/gallery/2068664
http://www.irenelucier.com/gallery/2358324#122084139

Two customers have reported the same error for their respective galleries, they both use IE7:

http://www.irenelucier.com/gallery/1849332
http://www.irenelucier.com/gallery/1702573

Of course I do not get the error when I am logged in. And we can all add single single photos without problems.

[tagcaver]

Hi tagcaver,

you need to have an account on the wiki to post bug reports. I can't quite remember how it add them, let me see what i can find.

Cheers,

David

I checked around. You have to have a Jotspot registration. Jotspot was taken over by Google. At the moment noone who wasn't already registered can join. So, there's no way for us new users to use the Bug Reporter right now. We'll have to just use the forum or email to report bugs for now.

It seems to me that if you have a Smugmug account or Dgrin account that one should be able to enter bugs with that info rather than needing a third logon ID/password to remember.

[Andy]

I checked around. You have to have a Jotspot registration. Jotspot was taken over by Google. At the moment noone who wasn't already registered can join. So, there's no way for us new users to use the Bug Reporter right now. We'll have to just use the forum or email to report bugs for now.

It seems to me that if you have a Smugmug account or Dgrin account that one should be able to enter bugs with that info rather than needing a third logon ID/password to remember.
put 'em here for now, no worries!

[digitalpins]

Hi guys I posted a while ago about different versions of safari looking different and the latest version of safari looks perfect and now I see that you guys have been working on it and its starting to look ok in the safari version 1.3.2 but I noticed something odd and not sure if you guys have caught it....

so I am not sure if this is a bug or not but its really wierd and odd, in this gallery http://www.digitalpins.smugmug.com/gallery/1201099 and also in all my other galleries the comments are on. But I check the gallery customization and the comments are chosen to be off. Really wierd cant figure out why its showing....:dunno :scratch..... again so far at work in safari 1.3.2 it looks like this but in the latest version of firefox it looks just great no comments at all...

It just bothers me because clients or other people in windows explorer or who dont have an updated browser may be seeing this wierd problem.

[Andy]

Hi guys I posted a while ago about different versions of safari looking different and the latest version of safari looks perfect and now I see that you guys have been working on it and its starting to look ok in the safari version 1.3.2 but I noticed something odd and not sure if you guys have caught it....

so I am not sure if this is a bug or not but its really wierd and odd, in this gallery http://www.digitalpins.smugmug.com/gallery/1201099 and also in all my other galleries the comments are on. But I check the gallery customization and the comments are chosen to be off. Really wierd cant figure out why its showing....:dunno :scratch..... again so far at work in safari 1.3.2 it looks like this but in the latest version of firefox it looks just great no comments at all...

It just bothers me because clients or other people in windows explorer or who dont have an updated browser may be seeing this wierd problem.

Olde Safari (1.3.2) will not get the new ajaxy goodness :) New versions of Safari will.

Sorry - it's a Safari issue, so we serve up the old style to that version of Safari so that you don't have a blank screen :)

We will check the comments issue in Safari 1.3.2.

IE6, IE7, Firefox users won't have any problems :)

[JFreeman]

I haven't seen anyone else mention this so I don't know if its just me. I posted this as a reply in another thread about stats so it might have gotten lost. I don't know if this is related to the stats bug or to to the update but the stats seem to be showing "total photo views" rather than "unique photo views". Each time I look at a gallery the stats record a hit on each size I look at each time; instead of 1 hit per user no matter how many times they look at it. The thumbnail count seems to be unaffected it doesn't increase each time I load a gallery. If I remember correctly before the update stats would show unique views not total views, right? Josh

[dcyphert]

I don't know if this is a bug or not...but before the new updates to the site I was able to see the word 'Buy' before the shopping cart options in my galleries. I didn't change any CSS to make this disappear.

Also, the Page nubering is not functioning for the galleries (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-3-9)....it looks like this...<< (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-1-9)< Prev (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-2-9) Pageof 4 Next > (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)>> (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)
I didn't change anything to make it do this either...anyone have any ideas as to what's wrong.:scratch I apologize if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

[Andy]

I don't know if this is a bug or not...but before the new updates to the site I was able to see the word 'Buy' before the shopping cart options in my galleries. I didn't change any CSS to make this disappear.
you have .title {display: none;} in your css. this blocks that word.

You have A TON of html that doesn't belong in your CSS.

I will have one of our specialists contact you, need to clean up your code :)

Also, the Page nubering is not functioning for the galleries (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-3-9)....it looks like this...<< (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-1-9)< Prev (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-2-9) Pageof 4 Next > (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)>> (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)
I didn't change anything to make it do this either...anyone have any ideas as to what's wrong.:scratch I apologize if I'm posting in the wrong thread.put the new pagenav css from post 1 here, in the bottom of your CSS. Adjust colors to taste.

[Barb]

I don't know if this is a bug or not...but before the new updates to the site I was able to see the word 'Buy' before the shopping cart options in my galleries. I didn't change any CSS to make this disappear.

Also, the Page nubering is not functioning for the galleries (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-3-9)....it looks like this...<< (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-1-9)< Prev (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-2-9) Pageof 4 Next > (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)>> (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376877#P-4-9)
I didn't change anything to make it do this either...anyone have any ideas as to what's wrong.:scratch I apologize if I'm posting in the wrong thread.

Hi Dave,

You might want to move your "header" and "footer" information that you have in your CSS code box to the appropriate box. Let's get that out of the CSS box first.

[jfriend]

I appreciate that you all figured out how to preserve most of StatCounter's functionality when moving to the new JavaScript driven release.

There is one detail in the StatCounter implementation that is different than it was before and appears a bit strange in the StatCounter results.

The referrer for each new image view is no longer right in many cases. See below for how this looks in the StatCounter report. The first referrer is correct, but the subsequent ones no longer show where the user came from when viewing that image. Instead, they show the original page they came from before viewing the first image.

I understand why this is since StatCounter is retrieving the last real web page the user was on and Smugmug viewing within a single gallery doesn't trigger any real page loads any more, but it's a bit misleading in the StatCounter report since the referrer line isn't showing where the user came from for each page if the previous view was within that Smugmug gallery. Any way to fix this or get it on the list to look at?

http://jfriend.smugmug.com/photos/125422367-L.jpg

[notrslau]

I have verified this on three machines all running Safari 2.0.4. Clearing cookies for both smugmug and my domain did not help. Galleries display correctly (thumbnails and initial medium sized image load), but clicking on any thumbnail takes you back to my homepage. I then noticed that the URL for a thumbnail or the next image link looks like:

http://www.rl-imaging.com/#77010240

When it should be

http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#77010240

Also, the link for "Next" page is

http://www.rl-imaging.com/#P-2-15

When it should be

http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#P-2-15

I have some CSS (which is pretty basic), no Javascript, a header and a footer defined. The galleries use a custom theme which has very simple CSS to set alignment/margins and disable borders.

Firefox sees the correct link, and is the only browser that handles the site correctly. IE6, IE7 and Opera all display just the footer (for any page even if I go directly to a valid gallery URL) even after resetting all options to factory and deleting all cookies. However, if I view source, I do see the content that is supposed to be there, everything but the footer is just not being displayed. I am guessing it is something funky I should not have done in my CSS? :dunno Thanks!

[jfriend]

I have verified this on three machines all running Safari 2.0.4. Clearing cookies for both smugmug and my domain did not help. Galleries display correctly (thumbnails and initial medium sized image load), but clicking on any thumbnail takes you back to my homepage. I then noticed that the URL for a thumbnail or the next image link looks like:
http://www.rl-imaging.com/#77010240 When it should be
http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#77010240 Also, the link for "Next" page is
http://www.rl-imaging.com/#P-2-15 When it should be
http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#P-2-15 I have some CSS (which is pretty basic), no Javascript, a header and a footer defined. The galleries use a custom theme which has very simple CSS to set alignment/margins and disable borders.

Firefox sees the correct link, and is the only browser that handles the site correctly. IE6, IE7 and Opera all display just the footer (for any page even if I go directly to a valid gallery URL) even after resetting all options to factory and deleting all cookies. However, if I view source, I do see the content that is supposed to be there, everything but the footer is just not being displayed. I am guessing it is something funky I should not have done in my CSS? :dunno Thanks!

Under Windows, your site works in Firefox and does not work in IE6. I see a JavaScript error in IE6. When I look at the Javascript code (which I didn't study it in detail) I wonder if it the issue might be tirggered by the "-" in your domain name and Smugmug is getting confused when looking for a "-" delimiter at the end of the URL. The same gallery works in IE6 if you reference it generically without your domain name: http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/1542879.

It looks like you might need JT for this one.

[bwg]

I appreciate that you all figured out how to preserve most of StatCounter's functionality when moving to the new JavaScript driven release.

There is one detail in the StatCounter implementation that is different than it was before and appears a bit strange in the StatCounter results.

The referrer for each new image view is no longer right in many cases. See below for how this looks in the StatCounter report. The first referrer is correct, but the subsequent ones no longer show where the user came from when viewing that image. Instead, they show the original page they came from before viewing the first image.

I understand why this is since StatCounter is retrieving the last real web page the user was on and Smugmug viewing within a single gallery doesn't trigger any real page loads any more, but it's a bit misleading in the StatCounter report since the referrer line isn't showing where the user came from for each page if the previous view was within that Smugmug gallery. Any way to fix this or get it on the list to look at?
Statcounter is pretty black & white with what we can do with it. Because of the way their script is, there is not a whole lot I can do that doesn't violate their TOS. I'll look to see what I can do.

[{JT}]

It was something in your customizations; I had to remove this:
<BASE HREF="http://www.rl-imaging.com/">
Tested and works perfectly in Safari.



I have verified this on three machines all running Safari 2.0.4. Clearing cookies for both smugmug and my domain did not help. Galleries display correctly (thumbnails and initial medium sized image load), but clicking on any thumbnail takes you back to my homepage. I then noticed that the URL for a thumbnail or the next image link looks like:

http://www.rl-imaging.com/#77010240

When it should be

http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#77010240

Also, the link for "Next" page is

http://www.rl-imaging.com/#P-2-15

When it should be

http://www.rl-imaging.com/gallery/1542879#P-2-15

I have some CSS (which is pretty basic), no Javascript, a header and a footer defined. The galleries use a custom theme which has very simple CSS to set alignment/margins and disable borders.

Firefox sees the correct link, and is the only browser that handles the site correctly. IE6, IE7 and Opera all display just the footer (for any page even if I go directly to a valid gallery URL) even after resetting all options to factory and deleting all cookies. However, if I view source, I do see the content that is supposed to be there, everything but the footer is just not being displayed. I am guessing it is something funky I should not have done in my CSS? :dunno Thanks!

[Allen]

I think it works cool now, makes it a lot easier to go from pic to pic. I had the
problem of picking the came from as I went down the list.
Al

[notrslau]

It was something in your customizations; I had to remove this:
<BASE HREF="http://www.rl-imaging.com/">
Tested and works perfectly in Safari.

Thank you! Oi, I cannot remember why I had added that.

As for the IE6, IE7 and Opera problem, Andy and Barb pointed out that it was a different problem in my header and footer. Basically idiotic typos I had made. I fixed the typos and all is well now. Whew! Thank you everybody for the quick replies and fix! :clap

[Andy]

Thank you! Oi, I cannot remember why I had added that.

As for the IE6, IE7 and Opera problem, Andy and Barb pointed out that it was a different problem in my header and footer. Basically idiotic typos I had made. I fixed the typos and all is well now. Whew! Thank you everybody for the quick replies and fix! :clapw000p :)

[dcyphert]

you have .title {display: none;} in your css. this blocks that word.

You have A TON of html that doesn't belong in your CSS.

I will have one of our specialists contact you, need to clean up your code :)
put the new pagenav css from post 1 here, in the bottom of your CSS. Adjust colors to taste.

Andy,

I'd appreciate an expert's help, I have been neglecting my code because I've been so busy...even though I knew it needed work..my CCS is rusty at best and referring my site to one of the guru's out there will greatly welcomed...

Also...I removed the .title {display: none;} from the CSS code and the 'Buy' word is still not showing...unless I missed it somewhere else.

Thanks once again.

[Andy]

Andy,

I'd appreciate an expert's help, I have been neglecting my code because I've been so busy...even though I knew it needed work..my CCS is rusty at best and referring my site to one of the guru's out there will greatly welcomed...

Also...I removed the .title {display: none;} from the CSS code and the 'Buy' word is still not showing...unless I missed it somewhere else.

Thanks once again.
More help is on the way!

[ivar]

More help is on the way!That would be me.

I fixed a lot of problems you had. It was nothing related to the change as far as I could tell. Open tags, or closing tags while nothing was open. HTML in the CSS.

You have CSS in your custom CSS (the customize page) and you are running a custom theme with some the same, and some differences from your beforementionend CSS. PLEASE consolidate that into one place. Either put everything together in one of the two places. It's really hard to see what's going on otherwise.

If I were you, I would get rid of the custom theme, and make the appropriate changes in your custom CSS. Getting rid of the theme also brings back the text that you mentioned.

[dcyphert]

That would be me.

I fixed a lot of problems you had. It was nothing related to the change as far as I could tell. Open tags, or closing tags while nothing was open. HTML in the CSS.

You have CSS in your custom CSS (the customize page) and you are running a custom theme with some the same, and some differences from your beforementionend CSS. PLEASE consolidate that into one place. Either put everything together in one of the two places. It's really hard to see what's going on otherwise.

If I were you, I would get rid of the custom theme, and make the appropriate changes in your custom CSS. Getting rid of the theme also brings back the text that you mentioned.

Thanks Ivar,
I think I understand....but do you mean I can't use the 'hot linking' from my domain server for the images in my header on SM, I wanted it (my SmugMug pages) to appear more like the user was on my website domain, that's why I did this. Also...the changes you made (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/)made the top part of my header stretch out beyond what's under it...I think it's just a table width problem? Thank you.

[DavidTO]

Not sure it's a bug, but I'm noticing that in smugmug view in a large gallery (like smugmug's popular today) and you click next page several times the main image starts to act funky. Try it. It's weird.

[Andy]

Not sure it's a bug, but I'm noticing that in smugmug view in a large gallery (like smugmug's popular today) and you click next page several times the main image starts to act funky. Try it. It's weird.Good catch. Reported.

[ginger_55]

red Xs instead of photos and galleries on smugmug for me. A few things show, but very few. It has been like that all evening and maybe longer.

I have nothing turned off, nothing changed. I cleared cookies earlier today along with my cache (temps, etc.).

Don't know if this is where I ask if it is me or you.........

ginger

[Andy]

red Xs instead of photos and galleries on smugmug for me. A few things show, but very few. It has been like that all evening and maybe longer.

I have nothing turned off, nothing changed. I cleared cookies earlier today along with my cache (temps, etc.).

Don't know if this is where I ask if it is me or you.........

gingerG, send details to our help desk, with gallery links please and we can help :deal

[I Simonius]

you might know this already but in case:

I minimised (Mac osX) the SM page and upload progress window and when I opened tem fuly again all details had gone

The progress bar still had text of 'upload in progress' but nowt else
The java section in the main window says 'this document contains no data'

Not sure if it is still uploading or not really

Justthought Id men=tion it

[CenterStageLori]

This may have been reported already, so if it is redundant, my apologies. But sometimes when I click on something in "Photo Tools" nothing happens. This morning it was "Color Effects" that was giving me problems; other times it's been the "Make a Second Copy." It's hit-and-miss, though. Sometimes it works with no problems; sometimes it just sits here doing nothing. I've discovered that if I then go choose a different photo tool and then go back to the, say, "Color Effects," it then will work again.

This has happened on both my Mac Powerbook using Safari and Firefox; and my PC using IE.

Oh, also, when I go to upload from iPhoto using the little program you have for that, I almost always get an error message first, saying something about a vector, but I just click okay and then it's fine. I never actually have trouble uploading -- it always works fine, but it just always first gives me that little message. I can't be more specific right now because I don't have my powerbook with me. It's not really a problem for me since the uploader works anyway, but figured it wouldn't hurt to mention it.

[Andy]

This may have been reported already, so if it is redundant, my apologies. But sometimes when I click on something in "Photo Tools" nothing happens. This morning it was "Color Effects" that was giving me problems; other times it's been the "Make a Second Copy." It's hit-and-miss, though. Sometimes it works with no problems; sometimes it just sits here doing nothing. I've discovered that if I then go choose a different photo tool and then go back to the, say, "Color Effects," it then will work again.

This has happened on both my Mac Powerbook using Safari and Firefox; and my PC using IE.
Thx - we've fixed this internally and should have the patch applied soon (hopefully today....)

[dcyphert]

:scratch I use mainly 'SmugMug Small' for all my galleries, I use this due the fact the width is contained under my header. My problem, which I am not sure if it's a bug or just an option change, is the 'Popular Photos' gallery (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/1/124342349#124642682) is in the 'SmugMug' style and is spread out to the width of the browser and doesn't stay contained under my header. I want it to look like any of the other galleries (http://www.propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376241#124525263)that are in the 'SmugMug Small' style. Can anyone provide any help or info? Thanks.

[Andy]

:scratch I use mainly 'SmugMug Small' for all my galleries, I use this due the fact the width is contained under my header. My problem, which I am not sure if it's a bug or just an option change, is the 'Popular Photos' gallery (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/1/124342349#124642682) is in the 'SmugMug' style and is spread out to the width of the browser and doesn't stay contained under my header. I want it to look like any of the other galleries (http://www.propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2376241#124525263)that are in the 'SmugMug Small' style. Can anyone provide any help or info? Thanks.
The link you use for your most popular,
Use this url and put it in a link on your navbar, then hide popular photos from your homepage?


http://www.smugmug.com/homepage/templatechange.mg?TemplateID=10&origin=http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/


Try It :thumb (http://www.smugmug.com/homepage/templatechange.mg?TemplateID=10&origin=http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/)

[jscoles]

I've seen a few bugs that only appear when I use Opera 9.

One is that buttons will occasionally be almost entirely hidden. All that is visible is the top edge of the button - just a thin white line:

http://jscoles.smugmug.com/photos/126499216-L.gif

http://jscoles.smugmug.com/photos/126499647-L.gif

I see this mostly when viewing slideshows, though it can also be seen in the control panel, and sometimes on other pages. When I see it on my home page, or in a gallery, cycling the theme to a different one and back seems to temporarily fix it. Since I know what most of the buttons say, this is a minor annoyance, really.


Secondly, slideshows have a funny twist. It seems like entering Opera's fullscreen mode (hit F11) corrupts the show somehow. Once you toggle fullscreen mode, the slideshow continues, but transitions between portrait and landscapes photos are now wacky:
If the current photo is portrait, and the next is landscape, the first photo will stretch out to the next photo's shape for half a second, and then transition to the next photo.

This is rather distracting:
http://jscoles.smugmug.com/photos/126502927-S.jpg

http://jscoles.smugmug.com/photos/126502934-S.jpg

http://jscoles.smugmug.com/photos/126502943-S.jpg

It sometimes does not happen immediately, but eventually, if I toggle Opera's fullscreen mode, it will. This occurs both with automatic playback and with manual photo advancing. Once the show is 'corrupted' in fullscreen mode, even toggling back to the normal non-fullscreen window does not remove the transition-stretching.

Also, the full screen toggle sometimes causes the slideshow to stop playing. I'll toggle fullscreen while the slideshow is playing, and then it will just stay on that photo forever. Clicking play/pause or 'p' doesn't seem to get it going again. Reopening the slideshow fixes this, sometimes, but not always.

Finally, a very minor glitch with the slide-down page selector in smugmug view. When I mouse over any part of the 'hidden' menu, including the thumbnails it partly covers up when it slides down, the menu shows up. I would expect the menu to stay hidden until I mouseover the down arrow, as it does in other browsers.


I understand that Opera is not officially supported by smugmug, but I wanted to point this out anyway, as it is an awesome browser.

[Andy]

I've seen a few bugs that only appear when I use Opera 9.

.
.
.

I understand that Opera is not officially supported by smugmug, but I wanted to point this out anyway, as it is an awesome browser.
Thanks. Yes, the officially supported browsers are

IE6, IE7, Firefox and Safari.

[imageinc]

Thanks. Yes, the officially supported browsers are

IE6, IE7, Firefox and Safari.
Clarification, please?

Are those the only browsers supported for *site administration*? Or also for visitors? And if the latter, do visitors with other browsers fall back to anything?

[Andy]

Clarification, please?

Are those the only browsers supported for *site administration*? Or also for visitors? And if the latter, do visitors with other browsers fall back to anything?
Those are the officially supported browsers for the site. Visitors. Owners. Anyone.

If they are using other browsers, they may have reduced function. Depends on the browser.

[dcyphert]

Hi Dave,

You might want to move your "header" and "footer" information that you have in your CSS code box to the appropriate box. Let's get that out of the CSS box first.

Hi Barb,

Thanks for the last response....I now have a strange problem with the footer....that is it's now showing in the header, on top of my header graphics I'm linking to as a custom header. Here's the Home page (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/), and it's not consistant on all pages either, some it looks just fine!:scratch All that is at the bottom is "RSS Feeds | What are Feeds?"..and sometimes the footer isn't visible at all!

http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888124-O.jpg

I'm using IE7 and the Carbonite Theme and I removed much of the old CSS from before, and the only code I have in the custom footer area is "<center>All graphics and photos &copy; Dave Cyphert unless otherwise noted.<br>
Images on this site may not be reproduced and/or used for personal or commercial use without written consent from the owner.</center>"

Also...I first noticed the cart symbols having a light background instead of being transparent like they were a few days ago..like this.......
http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888128-O.jpg,

and then on the SM logo on the Pro Pricing Help page, http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888116-O.jpg


Do you know what's causing this or what I can do to fix this, especially on the cart symbols? Thanks again!

[dcyphert]

The link you use for your most popular,
Use this url and put it in a link on your navbar, then hide popular photos from your homepage?


http://www.smugmug.com/homepage/templatechange.mg?TemplateID=10&origin=http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/


Try It :thumb (http://www.smugmug.com/homepage/templatechange.mg?TemplateID=10&origin=http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/popular/)

Thanks Andy!

[Barb]

Hi Barb,

Thanks for the last response....I now have a strange problem with the footer....that is it's now showing in the header, on top of my header graphics I'm linking to as a custom header. Here's the Home page (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/), and it's not consistant on all pages either, some it looks just fine!:scratch All that is at the bottom is "RSS Feeds | What are Feeds?"

http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888124-O.jpg

I'm using IE7 and the Carbonite Theme and I removed much of the old CSS from before, and the only code I have in the custom footer area is "<center>All graphics and photos &copy; Dave Cyphert unless otherwise noted.<br>
Images on this site may not be reproduced and/or used for personal or commercial use without written consent from the owner.</center>"

Also...I first noticed the cart symbols having a light background instead of being transparent like they were a few days ago..like this.......
http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888128-O.jpg,

and then on the SM logo on the Pro Pricing Help page, http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888116-O.jpg


Do you know what's causing this or what I can do to fix this, especially on the cart symbols? Thanks again!

Okay, first let's deal with the footer. Can you check now and see if it's okay? It looked okay for me, but I went in and gave your footer an id - <div id="myFooter"> and then centered it with CSS:

#myFooter {text-alignt: center;}

Let me know if that fixed it for you.

[Barb]

Also...I first noticed the cart symbols having a light background instead of being transparent like they were a few days ago..like this.......
http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888128-O.jpg,

and then on the SM logo on the Pro Pricing Help page, http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888116-O.jpg


Do you know what's causing this or what I can do to fix this, especially on the cart symbols? Thanks again!

I'm not seeing this behavior in Firefox or IE. Are you still seeing it?

[dcyphert]

I'm not seeing this behavior in Firefox or IE. Are you still seeing it?

Yeah...I'm still seeing it in IE...I'm not sure about FF...can't check at the moment.

Did you put in the code in the CSS...?
/* FOOTER */
#myFooter {text-align: center;}

just wondered where it came from, don't remember it. This problem is fixed once I change the theme only. But when I put it back to Carbonite it's there again.

[{JT}]

I've seen a few bugs that only appear when I use Opera 9.

Right after you wrote this line you really should have known who was repsonsible for any bugs you were about to report :)

At any rate, Opera still will not be supported but we will fix the buttons at some point so they are clickable.

JT

[largelylivin]

I filed a bug report but based on what I saw, the bug reporting system may be, well, buggy.:rofl

In gallery customization, I cannot create a new bulk setting, which is probably ok since I cannot apply one anyway. THIS IS MAJOR PAIN! I am going away now and hoping its fixed when I return.

"http://blue-dog.smugmug.com"

[Andy]

I filed a bug report but based on what I saw, the bug reporting system may be, well, buggy.:rofl

In gallery customization, I cannot create a new bulk setting, which is probably ok since I cannot apply one anyway. THIS IS MAJOR PAIN! I am going away now and hoping its fixed when I return.

"http://blue-dog.smugmug.com"
Hi, I'm not able to replicate, ie6 or FF. Can you please detail your exact sequence of steps, with gallery links and browser? Thanks!

[dcyphert]

I'm not seeing this behavior in Firefox or IE. Are you still seeing it?

I'm almost convinced the problem with my custom footer appearing at the top of the page is with that Carbonite theme, but not sure. After some tinkering, I changed the theme to something else and it looks OK. But as soon as I put this in the 'Footer' section of the customization area:

<div id="myFooter">All graphics and photos &copy; Dave Cyphert unless otherwise noted.<br>
Images on this site may not be reproduced and/or used for personal or commercial use without written consent from the owner.</div>

...with 'No' for showing SmugMug footer....the footer appears on top of my header!!! :dunno What is going on!!:scratch Does anyone else see this in IE7?......and it's only on my homepage.

http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888124-O.jpg

[Andy]

I'm almost convinced the problem with my custom footer appearing at the top of the page is with that Carbonite theme, but not sure. After some tinkering, I changed the theme to something else and it looks OK. But as soon as I put this in the 'Footer' section of the customization area:

<div id="myFooter">All graphics and photos &copy; Dave Cyphert unless otherwise noted.<br>
Images on this site may not be reproduced and/or used for personal or commercial use without written consent from the owner.</div>

...with 'No' for showing SmugMug footer....the footer appears on top of my header!!! :dunno What is going on!!:scratch Does anyone else see this in IE7?......and it's only on my homepage.

http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/126888124-O.jpg
One of our specialists will look at your code. Thanks in advance for your patience :D

[dcyphert]

One of our specialists will look at your code. Thanks in advance for your patience :D

Thanks Andy...I know my code is not the neatest looking and probably has problems but CSS is not my forte':bow

[Barb]

Thanks Andy...I know my code is not the neatest looking and probably has problems but CSS is not my forte':bow

Hi Dave,

You removed your footer. Want to put it back? I will check your code then. I cleaned a couple of little things up already. Let's see if you still have the problem.

[ivar]

Thanks Andy...I know my code is not the neatest looking and probably has problems but CSS is not my forte':bowI don't see any major problems, but 2 weird things.

your body tag is calling for 2 JS functions, yet there are no functions?

Also, you can't use poundsigns in your html: <img border="0" src="http://www.propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/97510251-O.jpg" width="759" height="41" #FPMap0 usemap="#FPMap2"></td></tr></table>
</div>

[dcyphert]

I don't see any major problems, but 2 weird things.

your body tag is calling for 2 JS functions, yet there are no functions?

Also, you can't use poundsigns in your html: <img border="0" src="http://www.propointmedia.smugmug.com/photos/97510251-O.jpg" width="759" height="41" #FPMap0 usemap="#FPMap2"></td></tr></table>
</div>

Thanks Ivar....I had removed the JS temporarilly to see if that was causing this, so I just now replaced it....I will also go through my Header code and remove the '#' symbols....

[largelylivin]

Hi, I'm not able to replicate, ie6 or FF. Can you please detail your exact sequence of steps, with gallery links and browser? Thanks!

Sure. I've tried several ways of doing it and they all fail. JUst did it this way, try it.

IE7.0.5730.11

Naturally, you have to go in as owner

(if you hit a passworded gallery its either Sport or sport.)

http://blue-dog.smugmug.com

Click on OWC Collection (Upper LEFT corner)
Click on category Restored
click customize under Stansberrys gallery
Set Quick Settings to Save below As...
put in a name
click save in upper RIGHT corner
(you are now in Stanberry's gallery)
Gallery Tools>customize
Check the pull-down for quick settings. Its not there.
Click Bulk settings
Check its pull-down for quick settings, not there either.


Thanks Andy

[Andy]

Sure. I've tried several ways of doing it and they all fail. JUst did it this way, try it.

IE7.0.5730.11

Naturally, you have to go in as owner

(if you hit a passworded gallery its either Sport or sport.)

http://blue-dog.smugmug.com

Click on OWC Collection (Upper LEFT corner)
Click on category Restored
click customize under Stansberrys gallery
Set Quick Settings to Save below As...
put in a name
click save in upper RIGHT corner
(you are now in Stanberry's gallery)
Gallery Tools>customize
Check the pull-down for quick settings. Its not there.
Click Bulk settings
Check its pull-down for quick settings, not there either.


Thanks Andy
Please try again, I was able to create "andytest" quicksettings.
Uncheck and check anything - change something and then do "save below setting as..."

[largelylivin]

Please try again, I was able to create "andytest" quicksettings.
Uncheck and check anything - change something and then do "save below setting as..."

OK. It works for your dummy gallery. I retried "Stansberrys" (just to be consistent) and it would show the quicksettings that you created but it would not create a new quicksetting. So, I removed the password and tried again, this time it worked.

So, New RULE #N: You cannot create a quicksetting while in a password protected gallery.:scratch

I just realized that also I haven't tried to apply bulk settings to passworded galleries. Hope that works, otherwise No Touchdown!


Thanks

[largelylivin]

OK. It works for your dummy gallery. I retried "Stansberrys" (just to be consistent) and it would show the quicksettings that you created but it would not create a new quicksetting. So, I removed the password and tried again, this time it worked.

So, New RULE #N: You cannot create a quicksetting while in a password protected gallery.:scratch

I just realized that also I haven't tried to apply bulk settings to passworded galleries. Hope that works, otherwise No Touchdown!


Thanks


Andy,

I just discovered the implications of this problem. Since you cannot create a quick setting in a password protected gallery, you cannot make the password and prompt a part of the quick setting. With about 150 galleries, many of which I need restricted access, I am really screwed. As you can imagine, I need this capability to make sure that all of my protected galleries have the same settings and so that I can change them all at once.

Please take note.

Thanks

[brandofamily]

Andy,

I just discovered the implications of this problem. Since you cannot create a quick setting in a password protected gallery, you cannot make the password and prompt a part of the quick setting. With about 150 galleries, many of which I need restricted access, I am really screwed. As you can imagine, I need this capability to make sure that all of my protected galleries have the same settings and so that I can change them all at once.

Please take note.

Thanks

would SmugBrowser help? It allows you to bulk change settings in entire categories all at once...

[jfriend]

In this dpreview thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=21938496), a user trying to check out my site with
IE version: 6.0.2800.1106 reports that IE crashes.

Unfortunately for Smugmug, this dpreview thread was discussing various photo hosting sites.

I don't know exactly where it crashed for them, but the two links I had provided where the same two in my sig here. You can follow up with the user in dpreview directly if you want more info from him.

EDIT: I see that Andy is already over in the dpreview thread.

[Andy]

In this dpreview thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=21938496), a user trying to check out my site with
IE version: 6.0.2800.1106 reports that IE crashes.

Unfortunately for Smugmug, this dpreview thread was discussing various photo hosting sites.

I don't know exactly where it crashed for them, but the two links I had provided where the same two in my sig here. You can follow up with the user in dpreview directly if you want more info from him.

EDIT: I see that Andy is already over in the dpreview thread.
It's definitely something local to his machine, I've validated your site several times, my IE6 & 7 and others.

[Andy]

In this dpreview thread (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=21938496), a user trying to check out my site with
IE version: 6.0.2800.1106 reports that IE crashes.

Unfortunately for Smugmug, this dpreview thread was discussing various photo hosting sites.

I don't know exactly where it crashed for them, but the two links I had provided where the same two in my sig here. You can follow up with the user in dpreview directly if you want more info from him.

EDIT: I see that Andy is already over in the dpreview thread.
He's on Win98, that's not a good sign :) Honestly, we don't test for that and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the culprit... it's nearly 10 years old OS :)

[imageinc]

He's on Win98, that's not a good sign :) Honestly, we don't test for that and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the culprit... it's nearly 10 years old OS :)

It sure is.

Amusingly, I just upgraded a user from 98 to 2000 (which, yeah, I know, is *also* out of support)...

his 98 install date was Feb 24 2002.

[bwg]

He's on Win98, that's not a good sign :) Honestly, we don't test for that and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the culprit... it's nearly 10 years old OS :)That also means he can't be running the latest version of IE6.

[imageinc]

That also means he can't be running the latest version of IE6.

Nope; 98 went all the way to 6.0.2600.

That *is* the last release, isn't it?

[ivar]

Nope; 98 went all the way to 6.0.2600.

That *is* the last release, isn't it?:nah

[imageinc]

Well, according to this Microsoft webpage (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/164539/en-us), that appears to actually be the last 6.0 that wasn't platform-specific, though an argument might be made for 2800, which was what I actually meant to type. :-)

[todosLados]

The Google Map timeline for my account (http://maps.smugmug.com/?feedType=geoUser&Data=neb) doesn't sort the timeline by EXIF date.
I mentioned this in a separate thread:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=52997

If you look at the EXIF details of the photos, you will see that they aren't sorted by EXIF.
Photo 1: 2006-01-15
Photo 4: 2006-04-22
Photo 6: 2006-01-29

The sorting changes depending on which photo I've updated last. Here's what I did:
1. Went to photo 4 (bee photo) in my timeline, which is in the "Animals" gallery. Photos 1-3 are in the "Snow" gallery.
2. Edited the geography of the bee photo (entered in an altitude).
3. Went back to the Google Map. Bee photo is now #1, followed by some other photos in the Animals gallery, followed by some photos in the Snow gallery.

I've since gone back and modified a photo's geography in the Snow gallery, so that they are now back to being the first photos in the timeline. So it's reproducible.

Ben

[dcyphert]

Here's one I hope someone can help with....

I have 8 photos in a gallery (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2425708#127257714)I'm using to feed my slideshow, but it's skipping the second photo, regardless of how I shuffle the photos around it always skips the second image. Is there a JS tweak I missed? It does this in IE 6.0.2900.xpsp.sp2, IE 7 and FF.........Thanks.

[imageinc]

Nice photoshoppage, there, guy. All 8 pix display here, both browsers (versions in sig).

[Andy]

Here's one I hope someone can help with....

I have 8 photos in a gallery (http://propointmedia.smugmug.com/gallery/2425708#127257714)I'm using to feed my slideshow, but it's skipping the second photo, regardless of how I shuffle the photos around it always skips the second image. Is there a JS tweak I missed? It does this in IE 6.0.2900.xpsp.sp2, IE 7 and FF.........Thanks.It's working fine for me, FF and IE6 - please put it on viewer controlled, change the styles a bit, clear your cookies and cache, then try again.

[mkress65]

AOL recipients of invitations via the share button report getting only garbled junk; same is true w/ Comcast; this has been reported in a thread on the SmugMug support forum, but so far no technical support staff has responded. Only Andy, and we all know how over worked he is. And I'm not clear on whether or not that Vegan thing is still happening.

[Andy]

AOL recipients of invitations via the share button report getting only garbled junk; same is true w/ Comcast; this has been reported in a thread on the SmugMug support forum, but so far no technical support staff has responded. Only Andy, and we all know how over worked he is. And I'm not clear on whether or not that Vegan thing is still happening.
Now you are being personal. Let's keep this elevated, shall we?

For what it's worth, mkress, I was a fat, overweight slob. I have lost 25 lbs and am on my way to a long and healthy life. Switching my diet was perhaps one of the best things I've done in my life, for myself. And I don't treat it as a joke. And, I don't appreciate snide comments about it. Jokes in fun, sure - but yours isn't. Lay off it, now.

Now, to business: As I said, our technical support cannot and does not respond to every single post. It's not possible, not should it be expected. We have a long track record of being extremely responsive to all of our customers.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=53379

If this is indeed a bug (it's not, yet), then we'll fix it.

Thank you for taking the time to report this here.

[mkress65]

Now you are being personal. Let's keep this elevated, shall we?

For what it's worth, mkress, I was a fat, overweight slob. I have lost 25 lbs and am on my way to a long and healthy life. Switching my diet was perhaps one of the best things I've done in my life, for myself. And I don't treat it as a joke. And, I don't appreciate snide comments about it. Jokes in fun, sure - but yours isn't. Lay off it, now.

Now, to business: As I said, our technical support cannot and does not respond to every single post. It's not possible, not should it be expected. We have a long track record of being extremely responsive to all of our customers.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=53379

If this is indeed a bug (it's not, yet), then we'll fix it.

Thank you for taking the time to report this here.

Umm, nothing snide about it. Last I knew you were discussing a rib joint in Kansas. I had seen nothing on the site other than a very brief change in the words under your avatar about being a Vegan in Training and then that changed to its current whatever it is. I'm glad you are a vegan. I'm glad you found a way to lose weight. I didn't know that you needed to. I do as well, but probably won't go vegan or vegetarian, but I'm making no snide comments about anyone's dietary choices. I was truly curious as to why your title (whatever its called) under your avatar had changed.

I raised the issue here so that it would not get lost. Nothing nefarious or snide. I assumed that this was the place to post bugs, so I posted it. Since no one from tech support had commented on it, I thought perhaps they had not had the time to see it, so rather than force them to search through all the threads, I thought perhaps I'd post it in the bug report forum.

If you intend to talk to me again in this manner, please do so via emails.

[Baldy]

I don't appreciate snide comments about it.Touchy, touchy. :huh

Matthew, wrt to that vegan thing, you wouldn't believe...

Short story: I couldn't get my cholesterol below 230 despite being trim, doing extreme fitness, limiting myself to lean meat, veggies, fruit, nuts, whole grains and nonfat dairy.

The only thing left to try was going vegan after having all my triathlon buddies tell me The China Study was one of the most important books of the last decade. Finally a nutrition book by someone with impeccable credentials.

I had no idea true died-in-the-wool carnivores like Andy would follow suit. I've given out 24 copies of the book and 23 people have gone vegan, including most people who work at SmugMug.

Amazing.

Anybody who wants a copy of the book, email baldy at smugmug dot com and SmugMug will send you a copy.

[mkress65]

.

[photogmomma]

Touchy, touchy. :huh

Matthew, wrt to that vegan thing, you wouldn't believe...

Short story: I couldn't get my cholesterol below 230 despite being trim, doing extreme fitness, limiting myself to lean meat, veggies, fruit, nuts, whole grains and nonfat dairy.

The only thing left to try was going vegan after having all my triathlon buddies tell me The China Study was one of the most important books of the last decade. Finally a nutrition book by someone with impeccable credentials.

I had no idea true died-in-the-wool carnivores like Andy would follow suit. I've given out 24 copies of the book and 23 people have gone vegan, including most people who work at SmugMug.

Amazing.

Anybody who wants a copy of the book, email baldy at smugmug dot com and SmugMug will send you a copy.

I hate hijacking a post even more, but I'm curious about your cholesterol now... My parents have some serious health issues and I've been exploring new diet options for myself (diet from a lifestyle standpoint, not losing weight, although that wouldn't suck) to hopefully encourage them and your post piqued my interest. I'm off to Amazon to get this. (I just don't feel quite right taking you up on your offer.) :)

Thanks for being so open about it...

[Andy]

I'm off to Amazon to get this. (I just don't feel quite right taking you up on your offer.) :)

Thanks for being so open about it...

Andi, send us a note to baldy, we'd LOVE to get the book for you :D

[photogmomma]

Andi, send us a note to baldy, we'd LOVE to get the book for you :D

Barely in time. Thank you, Andy. I sent him an email. :D

[TheDuck]

I have lost 25 lbs and am on my way to a long and healthy life. Switching my diet was perhaps one of the best things I've done in my life, for myself.

If this is indeed a bug (it's not, yet), then we'll fix it.

Don't take this personally, Andy....but 25lbs only gets you a bronze award....I lost 70lbs myself recently before I'd let stand at the lens-end of a camera again! Seriously, congrats on the lifestyle change....it isn't easy but it's worth it!

Re: the "bug" - I've only tried sharing photos once with the button (I've always saved and attached the image to emails). I used the feature on 1/30/2007 to send a photo to three recipients. A comcast.net recipient replied "the attachment was not viewable", and the aol.com recipient said she only received "a page of numbers". Looks like a nice feature once it's fixed though.

Can we import an address book into Smugmug?

Be seeing you,
The Duck

[Andy]

Looks like a nice feature once it's fixed though.

Can we import an address book into Smugmug?

Be seeing you,
The Duck

Congrats to you!!!!!!


http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=481359#post481359
follow that thread. ALL known email issues have been fixed, internally. AOL and Comcast (both required some creativity on our part because of their quirky setups).

We hope that the fixes are applied to the live site very soon.

You cannot import an address book into SmugMug, sorry.

[Matt Sheridan]

Hiya, folks.

I'm an e-marketing guy for JPMorgan Chase, and we use SmugMug to host a bunch of photo galleries (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/) (event stuff, unsurprisingly). For the past couple weeks, a lot of us here have been having some weird problems trying to view our galleries, and SmugMug galleries in general.

Multiple users in different offices--hell, in different states--have had the same problems. I believe we're all on IE 6 and Win XP. The really odd thing about these problems, though, is that they're apparently variable from hour to hour.

Usually, when trying to view a gallery, I'll get an IE error dialog box that says "Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site [gallery URL here]. Operation aborted". I hit "OK", and the browser resolves to the standard "The page cannot be displayed" message.

At other times, though--while going to the very same galleries, mind you--I'll get that same IE error, but clicking OK will actually take me to the gallery . . . except only the thumbnails will load up, and the larger image on the right will be missing, even when the thumbnails are clicked.

And, then, just to really confuse me, sometimes it'll all just work fine. I'm still trying to figure out it it's restarted that fixes it, and maybe some other activity (just prolonged IE use?) that causes the problem to inevitably return . . . or if it's all just completely random.

Whatever's going on, it seems to be tied into the style used by the gallery. For example, this gallery (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/gallery/1473293) is completely broken for me right now, as is this one (http://photos.military.com/popular/today/1/125513989). However, this gallery (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/gallery/1942680)--which I believe is using a style that's somewhat lighter on the DHTML works fine. Meanwhile, this gallery (http://www.smugmug.com/community/flowers-flowers-and-more-flowers/popular/today/1/7810607#7810607) is partially working, letting me view the thumbnails but not the larger-size images.

The more I experiment, though, the less sense this phenomenon seems to make.

Has anyone else run into something like this, or is it just the result of some security software or overzealous firewall settings that all us JPMC people have in common?

[Andy]

Hiya, folks.

I'm an e-marketing guy for JPMorgan Chase, and we use SmugMug to host a bunch of photo galleries (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/) (event stuff, unsurprisingly). For the past couple weeks, a lot of us here have been having some weird problems trying to view our galleries, and SmugMug galleries in general.

Multiple users in different offices--hell, in different states--have had the same problems. I believe we're all on IE 6 and Win XP. The really odd thing about these problems, though, is that they're apparently variable from hour to hour.

Usually, when trying to view a gallery, I'll get an IE error dialog box that says "Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site [gallery URL here]. Operation aborted". I hit "OK", and the browser resolves to the standard "The page cannot be displayed" message.

At other times, though--while going to the very same galleries, mind you--I'll get that same IE error, but clicking OK will actually take me to the gallery . . . except only the thumbnails will load up, and the larger image on the right will be missing, even when the thumbnails are clicked.

And, then, just to really confuse me, sometimes it'll all just work fine. I'm still trying to figure out it it's restarted that fixes it, and maybe some other activity (just prolonged IE use?) that causes the problem to inevitably return . . . or if it's all just completely random.

Whatever's going on, it seems to be tied into the style used by the gallery. For example, this gallery (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/gallery/1473293) is completely broken for me right now, as is this one (http://photos.military.com/popular/today/1/125513989). However, this gallery (http://jpmc.smugmug.com/gallery/1942680)--which I believe is using a style that's somewhat lighter on the DHTML works fine. Meanwhile, this gallery (http://www.smugmug.com/community/flowers-flowers-and-more-flowers/popular/today/1/7810607#7810607) is partially working, letting me view the thumbnails but not the larger-size images.

The more I experiment, though, the less sense this phenomenon seems to make.

Has anyone else run into something like this, or is it just the result of some security software or overzealous firewall settings that all us JPMC people have in common?
Hi Matt,

Sure sounds like JPM Chase (my bank, btw :thumb) is blocking access to certain parts of our system. I'm guessing you don't have any trouble when accessing from home or outside of the office?

We've seen this before sometimes. Let us know.

[Matt Sheridan]

Hi Matt,

Sure sounds like JPM Chase (my bank, btw :thumb) is blocking access to certain parts of our system. I'm guessing you don't have any trouble when accessing from home or outside of the office?

We've seen this before sometimes. Let us know.
Yep. It's only JPMC offices that are actually having any trouble. Using IE 6 and Win XP from home, everything works fine. Naturally, our network security settings are pretty much out of our hands, so I guess the only solution is to switch to the older gallery style, huh?

[Andy]

Yep. It's only JPMC offices that are actually having any trouble. Using IE 6 and Win XP from home, everything works fine. Naturally, our network security settings are pretty much out of our hands, so I guess the only solution is to switch to the older gallery style, huh? I would guess... but you can always ask IT....

[det1rac]

It appears that this gallery has my hit counter on it.

I dont know how to contact the guy or find out if its a smugmug thing.


http://robertbarnettphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/2414366

You'll noticed @ the top his gallery has my name on it.

Can we get it removed? i.e.. the hit counter.

bob

[Andy]

It appears that this gallery has my hit counter on it.

I dont know how to contact the guy or find out if its a smugmug thing.


http://robertbarnettphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/2414366

You'll noticed @ the top his gallery has my name on it.

Can we get it removed? i.e.. the hit counter.

bob
Hi Bob, I'm not seeing what you are describing, can you be more detailed? Can you provide a screenshot? Thanks.

[det1rac]

Hi Bob, I'm not seeing what you are describing, can you be more detailed? Can you provide a screenshot? Thanks.

Andy,
Sorry, he may have fix it, I left a comment about it at the same time I left this posting.

It may have did this when he joined the pentax community I created.

Thanks anyway, and I appreciate the quick f/u.

bob

[Nimai]

This "bug" crept up after the new AJAX'y SmugMug upgrade.
I found that when I use the Color Effects < photo tool >, but then decide to browse back, the < photo tool > drop-down menu remains on Color Effects. Picking Color Effects again from the drop-down doesn't do anything at that point. Even clicking on another picture, or navigating doesn't "reset" the < photo tools > drop-down. The only way to choose Color Effects again is to pick a different tool, or pick the "< photo tool >" top entry in the drop down (which causes a full page reload :bluduh)
Might I suggest that switching at least switching photos or pages should reset the < photo tool > drop-down.
Thanks!

[Andy]

This "bug" crept up after the new AJAX'y SmugMug upgrade.
I found that when I use the Color Effects < photo tool >, but then decide to browse back, the < photo tool > drop-down menu remains on Color Effects. Picking Color Effects again from the drop-down doesn't do anything at that point. Even clicking on another picture, or navigating doesn't "reset" the < photo tools > drop-down. The only way to choose Color Effects again is to pick a different tool, or pick the "< photo tool >" top entry in the drop down (which causes a full page reload :bluduh)
Might I suggest that switching at least switching photos or pages should reset the < photo tool > drop-down.
Thanks!
Hi, it's been that way forever. Don't know the tech reason behind it but it's not something that can be changed AFAIK. You just have to change the menu and then go back.

[Nimai]

Hi, it's been that way forever. Don't know the tech reason behind it but it's not something that can be changed AFAIK. You just have to change the menu and then go back.Musta just never noticed!
Seems like clickin' on a thumb or on the page nav could set the selected index of the < tools > drop-downs...

[Seymore]

When viewing my overall stats, I get some (and only some) of the statgraphs showing as a RED-X. Cleared temp... W2k/SP4 and IE6... Clean on the virus and adware fronts... Didn't find anyone else reporting this. Just happened since the Mar 8 Scheduled Maintenance Alert.

Anything else I should check on my end?

[Andy]

When viewing my overall stats, I get some (and only some) of the statgraphs showing as a RED-X. Cleared temp... W2k/SP4 and IE6... Clean on the virus and adware fronts... Didn't find anyone else reporting this. Just happened since the Mar 8 Scheduled Maintenance Alert.

Anything else I should check on my end?
Hi Seymore, I see it... I don't know why it is this way, I've raised the flag for some help... I'm traveling right now, but if you don't hear back right here within 24 hours, please write our help desk.

Thanks!

[Andy]

When viewing my overall stats, I get some (and only some) of the statgraphs showing as a RED-X. Cleared temp... W2k/SP4 and IE6... Clean on the virus and adware fronts... Didn't find anyone else reporting this. Just happened since the Mar 8 Scheduled Maintenance Alert.

Anything else I should check on my end?
It's a bug, albeit a "small" one, of the stats system.

If only Smalls have been seen, we treat that as if there are no hits.

Go view a Medium or any other size in that gallery, they'll show up.

Try it, it works. It's a bug, but I don't know if/how/when it will be fixed. Sorry for the hassle.

[Seymore]

OK Andy. Thanks for the response and confirmation on this bug. Hopefully the coders can work this out. More of an irritant at this point.

Thanks man... :thumb

[jfriend]

My wife was browsing my gallery (link in my sig) when she called me over to say "how do I get this thing off the main image". I told her to move the mouse off the image. She said, the mouse isn't on the image. I got up and walked over to her computer. Sure enough, the "thumbs, save photo" popup was stuck on the image without the mouse being anywhere near the image.

I mouse over and then out thinking that might clear it. Nope, still there.

I selected other images in the gallery. Nope, still there.

Finally, I hit browser page refresh and it went away.

I'd hate for this to happen to my viewers who wouldn't have such ready access to tech support.

She was using Firefox 2.0.0.2.

There's a real bug in there somewhere that makes the pop-up palette get stuck sometimes during normal usage on a non-customized site. I don't know how to reproduce it. I haven't done any customization related to the popup.

If you aren't able to figure out why it gets stuck up, I wonder if you could make it more likely to be self healing. If you wave the mouse over and then out, it seems like you could make it self healing so that the palette gets taken down in that circumstance no matter what happened previously (e.g. some page-global-state could get cleared).

[Allen]

...

She was using Firefox 2.0.0.2.

There's a real bug in there somewhere that makes the pop-up palette get stuck sometimes during normal usage on a non-customized site. I don't know how to reproduce it. I haven't done any customization related to the popup.
... I see this all the time so can confirm. Real pain that only page refresh solves. Also using Firefox 2.0.0.2.

[Andy]

My wife was browsing my gallery (link in my sig) when she called me over to say "how do I get this thing off the main image". I told her to move the mouse off the image. She said, the mouse isn't on the image. I got up and walked over to her computer. Sure enough, the "thumbs, save photo" popup was stuck on the image without the mouse being anywhere near the image.

I mouse over and then out thinking that might clear it. Nope, still there.

I selected other images in the gallery. Nope, still there.

Finally, I hit browser page refresh and it went away.

I'd hate for this to happen to my viewers who wouldn't have such ready access to tech support.

She was using Firefox 2.0.0.2.

There's a real bug in there somewhere that makes the pop-up palette get stuck sometimes during normal usage on a non-customized site. I don't know how to reproduce it. I haven't done any customization related to the popup.

If you aren't able to figure out why it gets stuck up, I wonder if you could make it more likely to be self healing. If you wave the mouse over and then out, it seems like you could make it self healing so that the palette gets taken down in that circumstance no matter what happened previously (e.g. some page-global-state could get cleared).
I've never seen it happen, so I can't begin to know how to report it yet. I'll be sure that bigwebguy sees this though, and if he has any words of wisdom, he'll add them. Thanks John.

[jfriend]

I've never seen it happen, so I can't begin to know how to report it yet. I'll be sure that bigwebguy sees this though, and if he has any words of wisdom, he'll add them. Thanks John.

I just reproduced it on my wife's computer again. I don't know the exact steps, but if I put the mouse over the image, wait for the palette to pop up and then waive the mouse around. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. I suspect it's some sort of timing issue or missed event issue.

If I recall, there was a previous report from another poster (including a screen shot) of a stuck palette that was partially drawn. In my case, it's fully drawn, but certainly could be the same issue.

Because I think it's some sort of timing issue, I doubt you're going to get a smoking gun test case that reproduces it easily. If someone wants to fix it, they'll probably have to fix it by examining the code to figure out what code path (even an unexpected one) could lead to a stuck palette and then making the code defensive against that.

Let me know if you need any more info.

[jfriend]

I just reproduced it on my wife's computer again. I don't know the exact steps, but if I put the mouse over the image, wait for the palette to pop up and then waive the mouse around. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. I suspect it's some sort of timing issue or missed event issue.

If I recall, there was a previous report from another poster (including a screen shot) of a stuck palette that was partially drawn. In my case, it's fully drawn, but certainly could be the same issue.

Because I think it's some sort of timing issue, I doubt you're going to get a smoking gun test case that reproduces it easily. If someone wants to fix it, they'll probably have to fix it by examining the code to figure out what code path (even an unexpected one) could lead to a stuck palette and then making the code defensive against that.

Let me know if you need any more info.

Anyone from the dev team looking into this one? It's pretty ugly for the viewer when it happens. And, I've now seen it several times.

Even if you can't figure out why it gets into this state, defensive coding could make it self healing so that it would fix itself anytime the mouse when into and out of the main photo. As it is, no mouse movements will fix it once it's stuck. You have to leave the page.

[Andy]

Anyone from the dev team looking into this one?

Hi John, As I reported, it's been given to Lee (bigwebguy). I'm sorry I don't have any update for you.

[bwg]

Anyone from the dev team looking into this one? It's pretty ugly for the viewer when it happens. And, I've now seen it several times.

Even if you can't figure out why it gets into this state, defensive coding could make it self healing so that it would fix itself anytime the mouse when into and out of the main photo. As it is, no mouse movements will fix it once it's stuck. You have to leave the page.we know the bug and will take care of it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention John.

[jfriend]

we know the bug and will take care of it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention John.

Thanks.

[I Simonius]

OK I have stilol got this problem:
the small images do not show, nor is there any gallery controls or pic controls that are usually under the small image

So what I get is a page with the thumbs - nothing else

If I mouse over where the image should be the options comes up (size/info/redor green thumb etc

please tell me what is wrong?

ps same in Safari or FF, mac OS 10.3.9, currently on laptop G4 1.5

[Andy]

OK I have stilol got this problem:
the small images do not show, nor is there any gallery controls or pic controls that are usually under the small image

So what I get is a page with the thumbs - nothing else

If I mouse over where the image should be the options comes up (size/info/redor green thumb etc

please tell me what is wrong?

ps same in Safari or FF, mac OS 10.3.9, currently on laptop G4 1.5
For FF, please try these diagnostics and let us know:

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=288184

[I Simonius]

For FF, please try these diagnostics and let us know:

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=288184

both FF and Safari passed those diagnostics OK
Looked under 'Tools >Error Console ' and saw this (part of, just a screenshot)

[ivar]

both FF and Safari passed those diagnostics OK
Looked under 'Tools >Error Console ' and saw this (part of, just a screenshot)Hi Simon,

The errors that you see here are not errors actually. The properties with an underscore in front of them, are for IE5/6 only. It's a hack, and not an official CSS2.1 reccomendation. That's why it may show as an error. It shouldn't have any effect on you (not) seeing the main image though.

Have you installed the latest version of Java? Please visit www.java.com . If you click to install the most up to date version, the site will automatically direct you to the correct version for your system.

Let us know if that helps. Thanks.

[I Simonius]

Hi Simon,

The errors that you see here are not errors actually. The properties with an underscore in front of them, are for IE5/6 only. It's a hack, and not an official CSS2.1 reccomendation. That's why it may show as an error. It shouldn't have any effect on you (not) seeing the main image though.

Have you installed the latest version of Java? Please visit www.java.com . If you click to install the most up to date version, the site will automatically direct you to the correct version for your system.

Let us know if that helps. Thanks.


It only offers updates for 10.4.x not 10.3.9 which I have.

All my software updates are up to date (AFAICS)

It didnt do this before the recent upgrades to the SM style Im sure - help! eek

[Andy]

It only offers updates for 10.4.x not 10.3.9 which I have.

All my software updates are up to date (AFAICS)

It didnt do this before the recent upgrades to the SM style Im sure - help! eek
Are you running ANY external softwares - security software, adblockers, extensions?

[I Simonius]

Are you running ANY external softwares - security software, adblockers, extensions?

Not as far as Im aware, I wouldn't know, not that I have installed anyway.

How would I know if there were any ?

[Andy]

Not as far as Im aware, I wouldn't know, not that I have installed anyway.

How would I know if there were any ?
Simon, have you tried another computer? One on a different connection than the one you are using right now?

[I Simonius]

Simon, have you tried another computer? One on a different connection than the one you are using right now?

No I can't get to another computewr but.. Safari has just suddenly started working- WEIRD! - The only thing I have done is to check the network settings and sharing (in system preferences) but didnt change anything

However FF still is acting up, i.e. not working with SM, and before you ask.. yes I tried logging out and in again ;-)

[corbosman]

No I can't get to another computewr but.. Safari has just suddenly started working- WEIRD! - The only thing I have done is to check the network settings and sharing (in system preferences) but didnt change anything

However FF still is acting up, i.e. not working with SM, and before you ask.. yes I tried logging out and in again ;-) Are you maybe using a proxy? In firefox check under Options->Network->Connection. Does it say 'Direct connection to the Internet' ?

If it doesnt, set it to Direct Connection. If it does, could your ISP or company be forcing a proxy without you knowing?

Cor

[I Simonius]

Are you maybe using a proxy? In firefox check under Options->Network->Connection. Does it say 'Direct connection to the Internet' ?

If it doesnt, set it to Direct Connection. If it does, could your ISP or company be forcing a proxy without you knowing?

Cor

I looked under preferences and it a direct connection

[corbosman]

Does it also happen when you use a different style like Traditional? For instance, go to this link http://www.moonriverphotography.com/gallery/634937#131884030

Same problem in all styles?

Cor

[I Simonius]

Does it also happen when you use a different style like Traditional? For instance, go to this link http://www.moonriverphotography.com/gallery/634937#131884030

Same problem in all styles?

Cor

Andy's site shpowed up fine so Imtried a few different styles on mine - all the 'smug' styles

None worked

[I Simonius]

I am also getting these peoblems (screenshots)

clicking 'next' page in a gallery
http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gallery/1411050#P-1-15

[I Simonius]

one on choosing 'Watermarking'

[I Simonius]

missing thumbs in this gallery

http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gallery/1411050#P-1-15

[Andy]

missing thumbs in this gallery

http://digital-finger.smugmug.com/gallery/1411050#P-1-15
Simon, there is something on your end that is blocking much of our code- we just have to help figure this out.

[I Simonius]

endless processing pics in NEW IN gallery

I have deleted that gallewry now as the watermarking was unfixable you guys told me a while back

[I Simonius]

Simon, there is something on your end that is blocking much of our code

I've looked in the mirror and can't see anything on my end!:rofl

Seriously though: OK so any ideas what it could be?

any more tests I can run?

[I Simonius]

No more suggestions then chaps?

Safari has stopped displaying thepages again BTW
No idea why...

[Andy]

No more suggestions then chaps?

Safari has stopped displaying thepages again BTW
No idea why...
Simon, we don't know what's happening with your account.

I would like you to try something please. See your PMs.

[Karenl39]

I'm trying to create a gallery today and getting a "page not found" internet explorer message. Any ideas why? It won't let me create a new gallery.

[Andy]

I'm trying to create a gallery today and getting a "page not found" internet explorer message. Any ideas why? It won't let me create a new gallery.
Hi Karen, can you give us a link to the page you are trying to create the gallery from?

Are you using IE6 or IE7?

Are you certain that you are logged in?

[Karenl39]

Weird, now it is working. Sorry to bother you.

[Lex]

anybody seen the lower menu bar get slapped mid page across images before? Like this? I will not leave this image in my gallery long. I did escelate to real person using help, but no definitive answer, just a suggestion to clear my cache.

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/photos/138071724-M-1.jpg

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/gallery/2616763#138071724-L-LB

[Andy]

anybody seen the lower menu bar get slapped mid page across images before? Like this? I will not leave this image in my gallery long. I did escelate to real person using help, but no definitive answer, just a suggestion to clear my cache.

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/photos/138071724-M-1.jpg

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/gallery/2616763#138071724-L-LB

Hi Lex, I'll investigate - But I need to know what gallery on you site it was in. Also, was it only for the carbonite theme or was it with any theme? :ear

[Lex]

Hi Lex, I'll investigate - But I need to know what gallery on you site it was in. Also, was it only for the carbonite theme or was it with any theme? :ear

Andy, I primarily use the carbon theme. I did try a couple of pages in alternate theme s far. I'll pay close attention to make sure it is only carbon if it happens again. I've seen it a few times, and as I may have said on 2 different computers.

I am still learning Andy, and I am not sure if the URL is the SAME for me being logged in on my computer looking at my site with my edit control panel buttons visible, as if someone that is NOT me is looking at my site. Make sense?

But as myself logged in, the page above this occured on is:

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/gallery/2590410#136519242

When I posted that link to firefox NOT logged in, the menu bar was at bottom where it belongs.

I did see this menu bar mid page again while logged into my account at home this time, and when I made the JPG listed above, was at work, so it's something tied to my account, a theme, an image size, text description? something I "think"...

thanks Andy.
Doug

[Andy]

Andy, I primarily use the carbon theme. I did try a couple of pages in alternate theme s far. I'll pay close attention to make sure it is only carbon if it happens again. I've seen it a few times, and as I may have said on 2 different computers.

I am still learning Andy, and I am not sure if the URL is the SAME for me being logged in on my computer looking at my site with my edit control panel buttons visible, as if someone that is NOT me is looking at my site. Make sense?

But as myself logged in, the page above this occured on is:

http://fotogafer.smugmug.com/gallery/2590410#136519242

When I posted that link to firefox NOT logged in, the menu bar was at bottom where it belongs.

I did see this menu bar mid page again while logged into my account at home this time, and when I made the JPG listed above, was at work, so it's something tied to my account, a theme, an image size, text description? something I "think"...

thanks Andy.
DougHi Doug, we're looking into it. I can't replicate with IE7 on your site, logged in, or logged out :(

[Lex]

Hi Doug, we're looking into it. I can't replicate with IE7 on your site, logged in, or logged out :(

Thanks Andy, I wish I could do something else to help, but I don't know what else to do. IF I see it on another page, I will tell you...

I'm a power user in general on computers, so it's not a serious issue, but just an annoyance more than anything, and I am sure if not unique to me though, you all would still prefer to locate the issue.

thanks,
Doug

[nickphoto123]

Hello Andy,

I get my create gallery screen, but there is no place to submit.


Nicholas

[Andy]

Hello Andy,

I get my create gallery screen, but there is no place to submit.


Nicholas
From where are you creating a gallery, Nick? Give a link, please. Also, what browser and version are you using?

[nickphoto123]

From where are you creating a gallery, Nick? Give a link, please. Also, what browser and version are you using?

I use IE, can't locate version.

create a new photo gallery


Theme Preview

No Preview Available
http://nickphoto123.smugmug.com/img/themepreviews/default.jpg http://nickphoto123.smugmug.com/img/ajax_green_rot.gif



The Create galley input boxes ar super imposed on this image..

THIS IS WHAT I SEE.

I CANT PRINT THE SCREEN.

I am creating the gallery from my home page.

Thanks

[Andy]

I use IE, can't locate version.

Nick, it's help>about that will tell you the version.

[Andy]

I use IE, can't locate version.

create a new photo gallery


Theme Preview

No Preview Available
http://nickphoto123.smugmug.com/img/themepreviews/default.jpg http://nickphoto123.smugmug.com/img/ajax_green_rot.gif



The Create galley input boxes ar super imposed on this image..

THIS IS WHAT I SEE.

I CANT PRINT THE SCREEN.

I am creating the gallery from my home page.

Thanks

Nick, are you saying you don't see the "Create Gallery" button?

[nickphoto123]

Nick, it's help>about that will tell you the version.

IE Version 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gdr.061219.0316

[Andy]

IE Version 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gdr.061219.0316
OK Nick, please clear your temp files, and log out, close the browser, reopen, and log back in and let us know.

Thanks.

PS: Can you try an alternate browser, just to see what's going on there - we LOVE Firefox, it's free from http://www.mozilla.com --

Let us know!

[nickphoto123]

OK Nick, please clear your temp files, and log out, close the browser, reopen, and log back in and let us know.

Thanks.

PS: Can you try an alternate browser, just to see what's going on there - we LOVE Firefox, it's free from http://www.mozilla.com --

Let us know!

Hi Andy, Did as you requested. Same problem.

Why would Theme be mixed in with New category?

I downloaded Moxilla but am reluctant to change my system for a problem that seems to be on your side. This never happened before.

I was able to upload and move images between galleries after this problem occured.

Nicholas

[nickphoto123]

Hi Andy, Did as you requested. Same problem.

Why would Theme be mixed in with New category?

I downloaded Moxilla but am reluctant to change my system for a problem that seems to be on your side. This never happened before.

I was able to upload and move images between galleries after this problem occured.

Nicholas

UPDATE UPDATE

Hello again Andy,

I went through my pop-up blocker and added the exact url that shows in my browzer after I click on create gallery.
I went to my home page, clicked create gallery and the Create Gallery button displayed and worked. I created a test gallery.

Thanks for always being ready to help, i really, really appreciate it.

Goodnight,

Nicholas

[Andy]

UPDATE UPDATE

Hello again Andy,

I went through my pop-up blocker and added the exact url that shows in my browzer after I click on create gallery.
I went to my home page, clicked create gallery and the Create Gallery button displayed and worked. I created a test gallery.

Thanks for always being ready to help, i really, really appreciate it.

Goodnight,

Nicholas:thumb

[bratsscrappy]

Why do the captions of my photos all say Olympus Digital Camera?? Can I change that to show the filename?

[Andy]

Why do the captions of my photos all say Olympus Digital Camera?? Can I change that to show the filename?
Hi brat, it's because some makers put the makernote (Olympus Digital Camera) in the wrong place. You have two options:

1) change the captions on your end with something like Photoshop

2) use our bulk captioning tool:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/web-photo-album

I hope this helps, holler back if you have more questions.

[bratsscrappy]

Hi brat, it's because some makers put the makernote (Olympus Digital Camera) in the wrong place. You have two options:

1) change the captions on your end with something like Photoshop

2) use our bulk captioning tool:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/web-photo-album

I hope this helps, holler back if you have more questions.

In the bulk captioning, I couldnt figure out how to have it parse to the file name. Probably can't. Is there some way to force the viewer to ignore the caption field and show the file name. If there is no caption it would do that. correct?

[Andy]

In the bulk captioning, I couldnt figure out how to have it parse to the file name. Probably can't. Is there some way to force the viewer to ignore the caption field and show the file name. If there is no caption it would do that. correct?
Correct... if you have that checked "yes" in gallery customization.

[bratsscrappy]

Correct... if you have that checked "yes" in gallery customization.

I have it checked but, since there is something in the caption it doesn't show the file name. Is there a way to fool it into beleiving there is nothing in the caption?

[Andy]

I have it checked but, since there is something in the caption it doesn't show the file name. Is there a way to fool it into beleiving there is nothing in the caption?
Give me a link so I can sort you out :D

[bratsscrappy]

Give me a link so I can sort you out :D

http://bratsscrappy.smugmug.com/gallery/2532921#133103605

Thanks

Sooooo confused

[Andy]

http://bratsscrappy.smugmug.com/gallery/2532921#133103605

Thanks

Sooooo confused
See, look here:
http://bratsscrappy.smugmug.com/gallery/2532921/1/133103605#133103605

and you can see the file name, now that I removed the caption.

OK?

[bratsscrappy]

See, look here:
http://bratsscrappy.smugmug.com/gallery/2532921/1/133103605#133103605

and you can see the file name, now that I removed the caption.

OK?

Brilliant!!! At least until Olymus changes something else.

[Allen]

I have it checked but, since there is something in the caption it doesn't show the file name. Is there a way to fool it into beleiving there is nothing in the caption?
Using bulk caption add <> in every caption. Smug thinks there's a caption
but the <> doesn't display so all he caption will be blank.

[Guz]

I subscribed to my recent galleries feed and it shows all of my galleries. According to the help page it's only supposed to show the most recent 10, which seems more useful (is December 2005 recent?)

I'm using Firefox 2, is this the way everyone else sees it too?

[devbobo]

I subscribed to my recent galleries feed and it shows all of my galleries. According to the help page it's only supposed to show the most recent 10, which seems more useful (is December 2005 recent?)

I'm using Firefox 2, is this the way everyone else sees it too?

Hi Guz,

Welcome to dgrin :wave

I think the documentation might be wrong, by default 100 results are returned for the feeds. The default can be modified to 10 by adding the following the the feed URL...

&ImageCount=10

Cheers,

David

[renstar]

The new photo info thing doesn't seem to work with different URL structures. For instance

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/

and

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/140715405

give different results. The first doesn't read any info at all (even the photo size). This is weird as it is much easier for me to link the 18th photo in the gallery than the 18/whatevernumberthatis.

-Russ

[Andy]

The new photo info thing doesn't seem to work with different URL structures. For instance

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/

and

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/140715405

give different results. The first doesn't read any info at all (even the photo size). This is weird as it is much easier for me to link the 18th photo in the gallery than the 18/whatevernumberthatis.

-Russ
Russ, not a bug. The 2nd of your two links is the only valid link of the two you gave.

[renstar]

Russ, not a bug. The 2nd of your two links is the only valid link of the two you gave.

Then the first link shouldnt go to a photo, as it stands, that is buggy behavior one way or the other.

While I'm at it, make that a feature request.. hell of alot easier to get to the nth image in a gallery that way..

[Andy]

Then the first link shouldnt go to a photo, as it stands, that is buggy behavior one way or the other.

While I'm at it, make that a feature request.. hell of alot easier to get to the nth image in a gallery that way..Sure, if you like, put it in the feature request thread, no problemo :thumb

[jfriend]

The new photo info thing doesn't seem to work with different URL structures. For instance

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/

and

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/140715405

give different results. The first doesn't read any info at all (even the photo size). This is weird as it is much easier for me to link the 18th photo in the gallery than the 18/whatevernumberthatis.

-Russ

I haven't seen anything documented for Smugmug URL construction so relying on something that you don't see being used in your galleries probably isn't a wise thing. In the first URL,

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/

The 2657204 is the gallery ID. The 18 is the page number in that gallery not a photo number. In some views that only show one photo per page, it appears to the the same as the photo sequence number, but I think it's really just the page number. If that page number doesn't exist, it appears that Smugmug ignores it. You can see this URL construction in play in the Journal gallery style when you go from one page to the next and it works in the Smugmug style too.

It's a worthwhile question of the Smugmug developers to see if they have a URL construction that gets you the Nth image in a gallery. I wouldn't be surprised if it exists, but I don't know what it is myself.

[Guz]

Thanks for the tip, works great and I can email it out to people with the number I want, cool.


Hi Guz,

Welcome to dgrin :wave

I think the documentation might be wrong, by default 100 results are returned for the feeds. The default can be modified to 10 by adding the following the the feed URL...

&ImageCount=10

Cheers,

David

[renstar]

I haven't seen anything documented for Smugmug URL construction so relying on something that you don't see being used in your galleries probably isn't a wise thing. In the first URL,

http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2657204/18/

The 2657204 is the gallery ID. The 18 is the page number in that gallery not a photo number. In some views that only show one photo per page, it appears to the the same as the photo sequence number, but I think it's really just the page number.

Thanks John, that makes sense. I only use the views that are one-photo-per so I just assumed that it was actually the nth photo and not the nth page. Either way I still think it is odd that it can figure out what photo to display on that page but not figure out what exif to display. Seems like that would be a two line fix.

[Andy]

Seems like that would be a two line fix.

If you'd like to debate that with our engineers, cool - start a thread :D But I don't know of any such two line fixes :lol3

[renstar]

If you'd like to debate that with our engineers, cool - start a thread :D But I don't know of any such two line fixes :lol3

nah, no worries, it isnt a deal breaker. just wanted to make sure you all knew that a page seemingly rendered correctly with missing info

[devbobo]

Thanks John, that makes sense. I only use the views that are one-photo-per so I just assumed that it was actually the nth photo and not the nth page. Either way I still think it is odd that it can figure out what photo to display on that page but not figure out what exif to display. Seems like that would be a two line fix.
Renstar,

I think it depends on what style you have chosen, as different styles pagenate differently.

If you want to start on a specific image, your best bet is to use this notation...

http://[nickname].smugmug.com/gallery/ (http://%5Bnickname%5D.smugmug.com/gallery/)[AlbumID]#[PhotoID]

Cheers,

David

[PBolchover]

This has been reported in the Bug Reporter. However, its status has been changed to "Won't Fix", so I thought I would bring it up here, to warn people that it might happen.

(As an aside, if smugmug decide not to fix a reported bug, it would be polite to give the reasons for this decisions in the bug's comment field. Smugmug has a reputation for good customer support, leading to many users to help the company out, but by answering questions in the dgrin forums, and by properly reporting bugs via the Bug Reporter. If a bug is being reported, then it must be having an impact large enough to cause the user to research the bug-reporting procedure. By anonymously changing bugs to "Won't Fix" without giving a reason, smugmug is risking its reputation for customer service.)



If I go to the URL http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/houston-giraffe-houston%20zoo I get a gallery giving all photos containing the keywords "houston", "giraffe" and "houston zoo" In smugmug view, there is the option to remove keywords. If I then choose the option to remove the keyword "houston", I end up with the (incorrect) URL
http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/giraffe%20zoo
instead of the expected URL
http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/giraffe-houston%20zoo
The problem appears to be that removing the keyword "houston" actually removes all occurrances of the string "houston" from the list of keywords. This corrupts the multi-word keyword "houston zoo", leading to the error.

[Andy]

This has been reported in the Bug Reporter. However, its status has been changed to "Won't Fix", so I thought I would bring it up here, to warn people that it might happen.

Where do you see that? I can't find such a status.

(As an aside, if smugmug decide not to fix a reported bug, it would be polite to give the reasons for this decisions in the bug's comment field. Smugmug has a reputation for good customer support, leading to many users to help the company out, but by answering questions in the dgrin forums, and by properly reporting bugs via the Bug Reporter. If a bug is being reported, then it must be having an impact large enough to cause the user to research the bug-reporting procedure. By anonymously changing bugs to "Won't Fix" without giving a reason, smugmug is risking its reputation for customer service.)



If I go to the URL http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/houston-giraffe-houston%20zoo I get a gallery giving all photos containing the keywords "houston", "giraffe" and "houston zoo" In smugmug view, there is the option to remove keywords. If I then choose the option to remove the keyword "houston", I end up with the (incorrect) URL
http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/giraffe%20zoo
instead of the expected URL
http://pbolchover.smugmug.com/keyword/giraffe-houston%20zoo
The problem appears to be that removing the keyword "houston" actually removes all occurrances of the string "houston" from the list of keywords. This corrupts the multi-word keyword "houston zoo", leading to the error.
It's a bug, I've logged it on our internal system, and we'll fix it.

[PBolchover]

Where do you see that? I can't find such a status.
Go to http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter
Click on view all SmugBugs
Click on Smugbug 48 (the bug in question)

The changelog says
04/04/2007 03:13PM: Status changed from new to resolved by guest
04/04/2007 03:13PM: Resolution changed from open to wontfix by guest

[Andy]

Go to http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter
Click on view all SmugBugs
Click on Smugbug 48 (the bug in question)

The changelog says
04/04/2007 03:13PM: Status changed from new to resolved by guest
04/04/2007 03:13PM: Resolution changed from open to wontfix by guest
One of the perils of a public wiki. It's bugged, internally, on our internal site, like I said. I changed the status on the public wiki too.

[rainforest1155]

One of the perils of a public wiki. It's bugged, internally, on our internal site, like I said. I changed the status on the public wiki too.
I find this quite confusing that you have a public wiki and an internal one. It also occurs to me that it complicates stuff for the SM employees as well. Remember when I got that notification that my bug was fixed on your internal wiki (internal bug #41), but in reality it wasn't yet. My bug on the public wiki (bug #33 (http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter/SmugBug33)) still has the status new without any sign of that someone actually had a look at it.
That kind of makes me wonder sometimes if it's worth actually taking the time posting a bug in the wiki - here on dgrin most of the time one of the team responds very quickly to the issues. The only time I got the impression that somethings changing on the wiki when I got that notification from the internal wiki - then I saw that someone had copied my entry, probably manually, into the internal wiki. That was 6 months after me reporting the bug on the public wiki.

What I actually want to say. Why not put some more work into access rights in the public wiki and use that instead of copying every bug report into your internal one which is then filed under a different ID to add to the confusion? Just make changing the status of a bug and all the other Admin stuff like deleting users an Admin only option. Why would you want to let a guest resolve a bug on the wiki anyways? Also only the one who filed the bug should be able to edit it. It's fine that guests can file bugs though.

With some access management and if the SM team actually starts using the public wiki as well, it should be more up-to-date and therefore more attractive for the customers to use. You can still keep your internal wiki for bugs discovered internally, but please handle the ones reported in the public wiki also publically. :wink

Thanks for listening,
Sebastian

[Andy]

I find this quite confusing that you have a public wiki and an internal one. It also occurs to me that it complicates stuff for the SM employees as well. Remember when I got that notification that my bug was fixed on your internal wiki (internal bug #41), but in reality it wasn't yet. My bug on the public wiki (bug #33 (http://smugmug.jot.com/BugReporter/SmugBug33)) still has the status new without any sign of that someone actually had a look at it.

Ouch Sebastian, I'm sorry it's confusing. I sent you a note last week letting you know that I reset it back. Have a look at bug 33 :) It's status open.

BTW, just file them here if you like. Thanks. I'll see if we can sort things out on the bug reporter!

[rainforest1155]

Ouch Sebastian, I'm sorry it's confusing. I sent you a note last week letting you know that I reset it back. Have a look at bug 33 :) It's status open.

BTW, just file them here if you like. Thanks. I'll see if we can sort things out on the bug reporter!
Yeah Andy, I got an instant reply that you'll check.
Basicly it was my point - the status of my bug always has been *new* (plus open for not being resolved yet) in the public bug reporter- just like it was when I filed it. To my knowledge it was never assigned to anyone. You just worked with the data in the internal bug reporter and, who ever has taken responibility for it, (I'm assuming here) forgot about updating the public bug reporter.

All in all this just looks like nothing is happening on the bug front which kind of makes me as a user wonder (general speaking for any user that might report a bug) why there's absolutely no recognition of what I spent my time reporting on here.
Do you get my point here with the mirroring you're trying to do here with your internal and public bug reporter and the problem of keeping them in synchronisation. There're just not linked at all to me as the bug IDs are different as well.

---end of general criticism about the bug reporting system---


I just wanted to add a personal note on the specific bug as it's an important one in my view especially because it's been around so long and involves a general privacy issue in my point of view.
Clearly it's most important when I delete a photo that the photo is totally not accessible anymore. It's understandable that you can't erase it immeadiately from all your backups as this takes time.
Still I also think that the whole photo page (including the caption) should be inaccessable as well from the point I delete the photo, which is apparently not the case and that's why I deleted the photo. It's especially essential in terms of google and other search engines dropping the link to the photo, but this only happens if you can't access the photo page anymore.

In my reported example which possibly could apply to a (big) number of other deleted photos it's been around 6 months without a resolution. You're constantly innovating and enhancing my experience, but I think that bugs really should have a higher priority over new features. It doesn't matter if it's a small or big bug - the annoyance with the user is usually higher than think. Normally you fix stuff way quicker than any other company, but there are sometimes issues (I can't name any right now) that take way to long to be resolved.


Sebastian

[Andy]

Yeah Andy, I got an instant reply that you'll check.
Basicly it was my point - the status of my bug always has been *new* (plus open for not being resolved yet) in the public bug reporter- just like it was when I filed it. To my knowledge it was never assigned to anyone. You just worked with the data in the internal bug reporter and, who ever has taken responibility for it, (I'm assuming here) forgot about updating the public bug reporter.

All in all this just looks like nothing is happening on the bug front which kind of makes me as a user wonder (general speaking for any user that might report a bug) why there's absolutely no recognition of what I spent my time reporting on here.
Do you get my point here with the mirroring you're trying to do here with your internal and public bug reporter and the problem of keeping them in synchronisation. There're just not linked at all to me as the bug IDs are different as well.

---end of general criticism about the bug reporting system---


I just wanted to add a personal note on the specific bug as it's an important one in my view especially because it's been around so long and involves a general privacy issue in my point of view.
Clearly it's most important when I delete a photo that the photo is totally not accessible anymore. It's understandable that you can't erase it immeadiately from all your backups as this takes time.
Still I also think that the whole photo page (including the caption) should be inaccessable as well from the point I delete the photo, which is apparently not the case and that's why I deleted the photo. It's especially essential in terms of google and other search engines dropping the link to the photo, but this only happens if you can't access the photo page anymore.

In my reported example which possibly could apply to a (big) number of other deleted photos it's been around 6 months without a resolution. You're constantly innovating and enhancing my experience, but I think that bugs really should have a higher priority over new features. It doesn't matter if it's a small or big bug - the annoyance with the user is usually higher than think. Normally you fix stuff way quicker than any other company, but there are sometimes issues (I can't name any right now) that take way to long to be resolved.


Sebastian
Sebastian, I have raised this again with the SmugSorcerers - thanks for your continued patience.

[renstar]

Renstar,

I think it depends on what style you have chosen, as different styles pagenate differently.

If you want to start on a specific image, your best bet is to use this notation...

http://[nickname].smugmug.com/gallery/ (http://%5Bnickname%5D.smugmug.com/gallery/)[AlbumID]#[PhotoID]

Cheers,

David


Update on this: it is still (well, actually) an issue. I get that the initial link I gave was malformed, but I hope this one isnt:
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2694311

I got that link directly off of my category page which is smugmug generated:
http://renstar.smugmug.com/Colorado

The photo info again does not load properly. In photos with exif, it loads, but the filename and photo dimensions (which are more important on the pano) don't show.


-Russ

[Andy]

Update on this: it is still (well, actually) an issue. I get that the initial link I gave was malformed, but I hope this one isnt:
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2694311

I got that link directly off of my category page which is smugmug generated:
http://renstar.smugmug.com/Colorado

The photo info again does not load properly. In photos with exif, it loads, but the filename and photo dimensions (which are more important on the pano) don't show.


-RussHi Russ,in the one just prior to it, the dimesions show. We'll pick up the dimensions if they are there in the exif properly.

[renstar]

Hi Russ,in the one just prior to it, the dimesions show. We'll pick up the dimensions if they are there in the exif properly.

Then why does it show here (this image has no exif as it is a pano stitch):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142693703

but not here (a photo that has valid exif):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931 (http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931)

but here on the exact same photo..
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931/2/142838746
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142838746
-r

[Andy]

Then why does it show here (this image has no exif as it is a pano stitch):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142693703

but not here (a photo that has valid exif):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931 (http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931)

but here on the exact same photo..
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931/2/142838746
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142838746
-r
Oh sorry - I'm terribly sorry I was dumb :D I understand now and have re-logged this on our bug list.

[renstar]

Oh sorry - I'm terribly sorry I was dumb :D I understand now and have re-logged this on our bug list.

No problem, sorry I wasn't more clear earlier.

-r

[Seymore]

Then why does it show here (this image has no exif as it is a pano stitch):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142693703

but not here (a photo that has valid exif):
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931 (http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931)

but here on the exact same photo..
http://renstar.smugmug.com/gallery/2696931/2/142838746
http://renstar.smugmug.com/photos/newexif.mg?ImageID=142838746
-r
Ren... looking at your pano, I'm wondering if (#1) the SW you're using to stitch is stripping the EXIF data? (#2) Or if you're using a new template in the SW, the EXIF is not being transferred. (I think the 2nd may be the case) Can you please share the SW you're using?

Thanks...

[renstar]

Ren... looking at your pano, I'm wondering if (#1) the SW you're using to stitch is stripping the EXIF data? (#2) Or if you're using a new template in the SW, the EXIF is not being transferred. (I think the 2nd may be the case) Can you please share the SW you're using?

Thanks...
I'm using panorama factory, I know the exif gets stripped, and that wasnt bothering me, it was the smugmug page not loading info that it knows (and loads) anyway, when the page is accessed from a slightly different URL. Andy passed it on and im sure it will be fixed sometime. It is a relatively minor thing that can be easily missed, which is why i was passing it on. It really wont be that bothersome to me if it takes a long time to fix as I'm sure there is much more important work to be done.

I can always use breezebrowser to put some of the capture exif in, but at this point its not that big a deal to me. Thanks for the offer of help though

-r

[gluwater]

Great addition to the product catalogue with the canvas prints. Just so happens I had someone ask me for these last week! I was checking them out and I found a glitch.

The default crop box for 16x20 mounted canvas is the opposite orientation as the image.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/144991085-L.jpg

The 16x20 rolled canvas looks fine.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/144991071-L.jpg

It's more of an anoyance than anything but I thought you might want to know.

[Andy]

Great addition to the product catalogue with the canvas prints. Just so happens I had someone ask me for these last week! I was checking them out and I found a glitch.

The default crop box for 16x20 mounted canvas is the opposite orientation as the image.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/144991085-L.jpg

The 16x20 rolled canvas looks fine.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/144991071-L.jpg

It's more of an anoyance than anything but I thought you might want to know.
Yeah I've logged it.
You can hit the red crop button and flip the crop :thumb

Thanks!

[jfriend]

I keep running into a real problem with the drop-down tools in a gallery. Here's what happens:

I pick a photo. I decide I want to see what the Smugmug color correction options look like for that photo so I pick "Color Effects" from the tool drop-down. I examine the different color choices. I decide I don't want any of them. I hit the back button in the browser (there appears to be no other way to cancel that page). Now I advance to another photo. I want to look at the color effects choices there. There's no way to do it. The back-button left the color effects item chosen in the drop-down and there is now no way to trigger that action. Since clicking on a different photo in the gallery no longer reloads the page, that won't even fix the drop-down. Even going to another page of images in the same gallery won't change the drop-down.

The ONLY way to select color effects on any other image in the gallery is to leave the gallery entirely and then come back again, find the image I want and start over from there.

This makes it impossible to go through a bunch of images in the same gallery apply color effects to some and not to others.

The choices I can see are:

Fix the drop-down so you can still trigger the color effects action even if it was previously selected (probably requires Javascript).
Add a cancel button to the color effects page so if I don't want the choices, I don't have to use the back-button - I can use the cancel button that won't leave the color effects item chosen in the drop-down.
Change the design of the color effects page in some other way that couldn't have this problem.
Change the selection of a commands like color effects in some other way that couldn't have this problem.It seems that the same issue could happen to almost any of the commands in the right drop-down (crop photo, Zoom thumbnail, Color Effects, Edit this caption/keyword, edit geography). Anytime you might want to visit several different photos, examine the effect of a command on that photo and then cancel some of them with the back button. Once you've hit Back, you can no longer choose that command on any photo in the gallery without leaving the gallery first.

Note, this problem is mostly a side effect of the January JavaScript changes that do preloading and skip page loads. The problem has always existed, but previously you could just select any other image in the gallery and the problem would fix itself. Now, selecting another image does not do a page reload so the problem stays until you leave the gallery - making it more of an issue.

[Andy]

Note, this problem is mostly a side effect of the January JavaScript changes that do preloading and skip page loads. The problem has always existed, but previously you could just select any other image in the gallery and the problem would fix itself. Now, selecting another image does not do a page reload so the problem stays until you leave the gallery - making it more of an issue.
JT's aware and promises something with this in a future release. Thanks John for making the posting about it :)

[Dennis_muc]

Hello Smugmug Team,

first of all I must say I am really happy with the services you offer. Even being in Germany, the performance is great (especially after the remake of your site)!
Since the remake I do have a problem in displaying the pictures on my PC at work (at home its fine). On both systems I am running Firefox 2.
At work the whole page looks fine, just the pictures are not shown at all.
Screenshot below:

http://dennis134.smugmug.com/photos/148987043-M.jpg

I have tried deleting the cache and cookies, etc as posted in other threads in this forum but nothing helps.
Can this be blocked by firewalls in the office or something like that?
What other options can I try to get it running?

Many thanks
Dennis

[jfriend]

Hello Smugmug Team,

first of all I must say I am really happy with the services you offer. Even being in Germany, the performance is great (especially after the remake of your site)!
Since the remake I do have a problem in displaying the pictures on my PC at work (at home its fine). On both systems I am running Firefox 2.
At work the whole page looks fine, just the pictures are not shown at all.
Screenshot below:

I have tried deleting the cache and cookies, etc as posted in other threads in this forum but nothing helps.
Can this be blocked by firewalls in the office or something like that?
What other options can I try to get it running?

Many thanks
Dennis
That is exactly what a page looks like if JavaScript is not running in your pages from work. That could either be because it's being filtered at the company firewall or it could be because the browser setting for JavaScript is forced off. I believe you can currently still use some of the other views (like all thumbs) that don't need JavaScript to display images. There may also be other work-arounds like using a different browser where Smugmug defaults to the old-style view rather than the new JavaScript dynamic view.

[rainforest1155]

That is exactly what a page looks like if JavaScript is not running in your pages from work. That could either be because it's being filtered at the company firewall or it could be because the browser setting for JavaScript is forced off. I believe you can currently still use some of the other views (like all thumbs) that don't need JavaScript to display images. There may also be other work-arounds like using a different browser where Smugmug defaults to the old-style view rather than the new JavaScript dynamic view.
Yep, chaning the view style works - just tried that. Also made a request (http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=543288#post543288) that smugmug includes a fallback mechanism via < noscript> and that they display a note that this site needs JS to be fully operational.

Sebastian

[Andy]

Yep, chaning the view style works - just tried that. Also made a request (http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=543288#post543288) that smugmug includes a fallback mechanism via < noscript> and that they display a note that this site needs JS to be fully operational.

SebastianDone and done. It's live on the site. :thumb

[Dennis_muc]

Done and done. It's live on the site. :thumb

Many thanks for the quick replies. I will give it a try on Monday and tell you how things are.
But you may be right that our firewall block JS. In MS IE it doesn't work either.

Cheers
Dennis

[dcyphert]

Using new Windows Vista machine; I created a new gallery and when I choose the 'Add Photos' link it closes down my IE session...help!...is this a known problem with this new OS?

[ivar]

Using new Windows Vista machine; I created a new gallery and when I choose the 'Add Photos' link it closes down my IE session...help!...is this a known problem with this new OS?It's a Java problem.

Please visit www.java.com and install the most up to date version. That should take care of things :thumb

[dcyphert]

It's a Java problem.

Please visit www.java.com (http://www.java.com) and install the most up to date version. That should take care of things :thumb

Thanks, as usual that helped...:bow

[RogersDA]

I logged in to my account and accessed the Control Panel.

Credit card change selected - Updated successfully.

On the breadcrumb near the top of the page (DaRPhotos > control panel > account settings) - clicked on control panel.

Scrolled to the bottom to get to the Gallery Categories.

Instead of the links for each category being something like:
darphotos.smugmug.com/Various Places (I removed the https at the beginning)

They are: smugmug.com/Various Places

If access the control panel from my homepage, then this is not a problem.

[Andy]

If access the control panel from my homepage, then this is not a problem.
Seems fine now, I just clicked "show" to put them on the homepage, then "hide" to put them back, the links now look good :thumb

[RogersDA]

Perhaps I wasn't clear - it's only the links that are assigned to the categories in the Gallery Categories section of the control panel (when accessed in the manner I wrote) that are screwed up.

My website itself wasn't actually affected.

Not a major issue by any stretch. Just making a note to the powers that be...

[Andy]

Perhaps I wasn't clear - it's only the links that are assigned to the categories in the Gallery Categories section of the control panel (when accessed in the manner I wrote) that are screwed up.

My website itself wasn't actually affected.

Not a major issue by any stretch. Just making a note to the powers that be...I got you just fine. Can you try it again, because the links are looking good to me.

[RogersDA]

I got you just fine. Can you try it again, because the links are looking good to me.

Thanks, Andy. Here are two screen shots from this morning. Running Firefox 2.0.0.3.

http://darphotos.smugmug.com/photos/149955538-L-LB.jpg

Clicking the control panel link at the top of the first image gives this.

http://darphotos.smugmug.com/photos/149955485-L-LB.jpg

[Andy]

Thanks, Andy. Here are two screen shots from this morning. Running Firefox 2.0.0.3.

http://darphotos.smugmug.com/photos/149955538-L-LB.jpg

Clicking the control panel link at the top of the first image gives this.

http://darphotos.smugmug.com/photos/149955485-L-LB.jpg
OK - after redoing it, I see that it's a persistent bug :) Thanks, I've logged it and assigned it to an engineer to be fixed. Thanks for your persistence with me!