Bad Smugmug Review

[DJ-S1]

Saw this review here (http://www.stephanelee.com/2008/01/08/smugmug.html)that didn't turn out too well for Smugmug. My thoughts on this are two-fold.

First, it's rare that I come across a review that doesn't reach the same conclusions I have reached - namely that Smugmug is a great service and well worth the money.

Second, the reviewer has a point. I mentioned it a few years back and it hasn't really changed since then - organizing or re-organizing existing photos and galleries can be a pain and it should be easier than it is IMO.

Personally I would love to see SmugBrowser developed to the point where it is an offline (local app) drag-n-drop kick-ass front end for the online site. Fiddle to your hearts content without 'net delays slowing you down, then hit the "commit" button and the changes automagically get synched to your online site.

But that's just me! :D

[kygarden]

I love Smugmug but my only complaints are (since we're on the subject...LOL)...

- arranging photos in galleries - too hard and takes too long (mainly for large galleries).
- deleting photos, either one at a time or bulk - takes too long even to delete 1 photo.
- updating or adding keywords - takes forever sometimes. "saving keywords" on the screen for like 30 seconds or more. Just seems like that should be a fairly simple thing to do and not take so long.

So I guess for me it comes down to the convenience issues. Just little nickel and dime petty stuff that over time aggravates the poo out of you. I've been reworking my galleries the last few days and teh arranging photos, deleting photos and keyword issues are the things that I keep coming back to as minor points of aggravation.

One more thing - feature request maybe. I'd like to be able to align galleries horizontally across the screen like you can categories and subcategories. the way it is now, the galleries just stack vertically and I'd like to avoid that - less scrolling.

OVERALL though, great service. Always room for imrpovement though :)

[colourbox]

It wasn't that bad of a review, but SmugMug could do some catching up in the direct manipulation area. I have not used the Flickr Organizr, but I have seen Twango.com and you can do things like drag-select a range of images right on the page. Technically, it isn't a competitor to SmugMug yet, and may never be a direct competitor, but they are doing a lot of things right on that site.

[darryl]

Second, the reviewer has a point. I mentioned it a few years back and it hasn't really changed since then - organizing or re-organizing existing photos and galleries can be a pain and it should be easier than it is IMO.

Personally I would love to see SmugBrowser developed to the point where it is an offline (local app) drag-n-drop kick-ass front end for the online site. Fiddle to your hearts content without 'net delays slowing you down, then hit the "commit" button and the changes automagically get synched to your online site.

But that's just me! :D

No, it's not just you. If you've tried Phanfare, you'll see they have an drag-n-drop app (works on-line or off) that is just *great* to use. Organize, caption, hide, delete -- it works *soooo* much better than the web tools on SmugMug.

I think SmugBrowser would be a great way to go. It's great that it's cross-platform, too. Heck, I'd be happy if it did all that stuff while on-line.

[Baldy]

I hid a little Easter egg on the site for users taking the free trial, with an offer: if they let me call them and ask how it's going with their trial, I give them a $25 Amazon gift certificate. So far I've made about 30 calls.

No offense to you who have used the system for awhile and are willing to speak up, but you tend to be more advanced. I was trying to get inside the head of less advanced people who won't talk to us because they get stuck and we make them feel dumb (even though we're the dummies if we're confusing them).

Anyway, what's coming through loud and clear they love the quality of the display, the way photos fill the screen, themes, the variety of uploaders, etc., but we're foiling them by hiding the photo tools and control panel, and not being clear about which does what.

So I'm afraid we're guilty as charged for this review.

It has our complete attention, however, and we're working on it. But it's a big job and we have things to finish that we're working on now, so we're not going to be able to rush out a quick fix.

[DJ-S1]

It has our complete attention, however, and we're working on it. Knowing how you folks operate that's good enough for me. Can't wait to see what the wizards come up with.:clap

[DJKennedy]

My biggest complaint is the adding of catagories, sub-cats, galleries. Maybe its just me but sometimes adding a new gallery is a little harder than it should be.

Placing of sub cats, placing of galleries in sub cats, then theres the catagories...arg!!!

I have several catagories that I dont really need but created by mistake trying to figure things out (again, since its been a while I did that step).

Couldn't it be a wee more simpler, for us simpler folk?

Other than that - :lustLOVE:lust Smugmug.

Derek

[kygarden]

Hey did someone do something? The delete and keyword addition features seem to be running faster for me for some reason now :)

[DJKennedy]

Hey did someone do something? The delete and keyword addition features seem to be running faster for me for some reason now :)

I think you're right, I notice my new slideshow loads *much* faster.

:clap

[digitalpins]

I watched the video on that link, I liked the video, it looks like a pretty cool place to work...lol I love the smugbunker

[twincitiesphoto]

I'll have to watch the video in more detail when I get home tonight.

I have to agree with the above comment about the gallery strucure - it took me forever to get my little head around that concept for some reason - not sure why.

I'm a pro user and love smugmug - always anxious for the next, fix,update, enhancement to happen - which it does regularly which is awesome. Its not perfect of course, while it is very customizeable, sometimes I wish that 'hacks' were built into the system so I wouldn't have to risk messing it up - for example, the journal style - I wish you could set it to have a larger photo size show in the set up without having to put your own customization in.

Overall, still very very happy with smugmug - it's not perfect, but it is pretty amazing for sure.

[Luc De Jaeger]

Take your time Smugmug Team so that all the bugs are ironed out if you ever plan to change the user interface. Imho there is no rush at all. Once you know the drill how the interface works, it's just fine, though not always convenient, but still fine.

And all the features that already exist and the unknown additions and things that you are working on will keep me with smugmug for as long as I can. While Flickr has some more convenient options (drag and drop is the way to go) I can not imagine living without smugmug. Flickr is good at photo sharing, but smugmug still has -- by far -- the edge in photo hosting and presenting images.:thumb :lust :lust :lust

Luc

[3n-out]

If there was one thing I would work on would be this. Make it more familiar with what people already know with a structure similar to windows.

My biggest complaint is the adding of catagories, sub-cats, galleries. Maybe its just me but sometimes adding a new gallery is a little harder than it should be.

Placing of sub cats, placing of galleries in sub cats, then theres the catagories...arg!!!

I have several catagories that I dont really need but created by mistake trying to figure things out (again, since its been a while I did that step).

Couldn't it be a wee more simpler, for us simpler folk?

Other than that - :lustLOVE:lust Smugmug.

Derek

[DJKennedy]

If there was one thing I would work on would be this. Make it more familiar with what people already know with a structure similar to windows.

I would have to agree (except for maybe when your talking about those 'other' guys on Macs!).

[com3]

everything has it's nuances... nothing will ever make EVERYONE happy...

overall, i think smugmug totally rocks.

what i would like to see, baldy, since you mentioned it, is perhaps a choice of interfaces... beginner and advanced... that way you won't make people feel dumb and you won't be dumbed down either for the more advanced users. :clap

PS - i still would like to see original's available to me when i'm logged in, no matter what i have the gallery max size set to. :D

PPS - i had a flickr account before...i let it whither away and die, as i found it to be the suck.

[3n-out]

Oh Smugmug Rocks! I'm a pro user and I love my Smugmug. But nothing says it can't be better! One of the reasons I went with Smugmug is because they always listen to their users community and that is one great thing about Smugmug thats for darn sure.

[jchin]

I have both. A SmugMug account (obviously) for my semi-pro work and love it. My Flickr account is pretty much for total strangers, friends and family to comment on my day-to-day or family photos. There is more random traffic on Flickr than SmugMug, IMO.

If SmugMug would give out free accounts like Flickr (very restricted account), then many more people might use SmugMug instead of Flickr. On Flickr, family members and friends can create a free account, I associate them as "family" or "friends" and they can then see my private photos. Maybe SM can implement something like that. Then I'd have everything in one place, SmugMug.

[Baldy]

Thanks, everyone. This is definitely turning out to be a mind-bending challenge. But we're trying not to get too distracted by it until we get the bugs out of a Flash player for video we're trying to ship, and revamping the current built-in slideshow with Flash.

We're hearing that the Flickr tools work great for small to moderate-sized accounts but when the number of photos gets high, they bog.

We have some interesting concepts we're working on but it's early.

[DrDavid]

Thanks, everyone. This is definitely turning out to be a mind-bending challenge. But we're trying not to get too distracted by it until we get the bugs out of a Flash player for video we're trying to ship, and revamping the current built-in slideshow with Flash.

We're hearing that the Flickr tools work great for small to moderate-sized accounts but when the number of photos gets high, they bog.

We have some interesting concepts we're working on but it's early.
I can tell you that when I tried to work with thousands of images on Flickr, it would work; but, take a LOOOOOONG time to do it. On smug, I can only have about 3000-4000 images MAX in a gallery before it just won't work anymore (deleting images, rearranging, etc..) So, now I have like 300 galleries to store my archive. I'd prefer to just have a few--like one per month or year.. On flickr, I could do it, no problems.

BUT, smug is WAY nicer to work with, the community is WAY better, and the API and apps are WAY better too!

The two things I miss most about Flickr are:

1) One image can be in multiple 'galleries'. Want to move a Collection to a set? no problems--drag and drop. Reorganizing is way easier.
2) Guest passes. I can hand out URL's to a photo/gallery, etc.. and, 'expire' the link. Similar to Smugmug, I can let people see galleries that they normally wouldn't have the permission to see. And, I can delete the 'pass' at any time, and it blocks their access.. Want to turn a public gallery into a private one (not passworded, just private)? Change the permissions. I can even make one photo in a gallery viewable by friends only (and not family) or vice-versa.

I've posted about this before. Smug should let *everyone* create user accounts--even if they are just to tag people as 'friends' or 'family'. i.e. No photo sharing.. OR, make it REALLY basic like 10MB and one gallery, or 100 photos and 3 galleries, etc.. It would increase the community feel on smug, and really open the door to a ton of possibilities in regards to permissions, private galleries, photos, etc..

Overall, I love smug.. I actually have a (apparently?) free lifetime Flickr Pro account (don't ask... I couldn't repeat it if I wanted to!), yet I still paid for Smug and put all my stuff here. So, in my mind, smug was worth the money (still is).

Now, do I wish smug would have the really cool flickr management tools? Flickr permission system? Flickr "photo notes" (draw a box on an image, hover your mouse and you can see a comment about THAT AREA of the photo.. super cool!)? Absolutely! But, would I ditch smug and only use Flickr? Nope.

David

[colourbox]

We're hearing that the Flickr tools work great for small to moderate-sized accounts but when the number of photos gets high, they bog.

While it's on my mind...speaking of bogging down, one thing SmugMug needs is a spreadsheet view of the settings in every gallery in an account. As the settings multiply, it becomes harder to view and change them in bulk, especially for older galleries.

For example, SmugMug added the "Hello World!" setting. Great setting, and one I'm like to apply to all my old galleries. But wait, I have to go through each gallery one by one, check the settings, and apply new ones. I wish I could list every gallery in a big table, look down the column for "Hello World!", and see in an instant exactly which galleries have that feature on or off. Or tick every box in every gallery right down the column in less than one second.

[devbobo]

While it's on my mind...speaking of bogging down, one thing SmugMug needs is a spreadsheet view of the settings in every gallery in an account. As the settings multiply, it becomes harder to view and change them in bulk, especially for older galleries.

For example, SmugMug added the "Hello World!" setting. Great setting, and one I'm like to apply to all my old galleries. But wait, I have to go through each gallery one by one, check the settings, and apply new ones. I wish I could list every gallery in a big table, look down the column for "Hello World!", and see in an instant exactly which galleries have that feature on or off. Or tick every box in every gallery right down the column in less than one second.

check out SmugBrowser, you can do exactly this, without having to select the options for each gallery. You can set one or many options for every album in your account, a category or subcategory

[DJ-S1]

Dev, SmugBrowser is really good and it's all I ever use for uploading. BUT - I can see so much more potential for it! I hope you will get a chance to free up some time and really polish it at some point. :deal

[Pupator]

Personally I would love to see SmugBrowser developed to the point where it is an offline (local app) drag-n-drop kick-ass front end for the online site. Fiddle to your hearts content without 'net delays slowing you down, then hit the "commit" button and the changes automagically get synched to your online site.

But that's just me! :D

Actually I think this is a good idea, and I know just the guy to do it. It would be a photo-centric version of this:

http://letterblock.com/

[devbobo]

Dev, SmugBrowser is really good and it's all I ever use for uploading. BUT - I can see so much more potential for it! I hope you will get a chance to free up some time and really polish it at some point. :deal

yeah, hehe.... tell me about it :D

there are many many features that I have dreamed up since day one, many of which couldn't be implemented until i expanded the api on version 1.2.1.

more recently, I have been prototyping some stuff in straight html/javascript, for two reasons, one to open SmugBrowser access up to non Mozilla browsers and two while firefox extensions are great, developing great UIs is difficult.

I may even look into flash and cut my teeth on that :dunno

[guy]

While it's on my mind...speaking of bogging down, one thing SmugMug needs is a spreadsheet view of the settings in every gallery in an account. As the settings multiply, it becomes harder to view and change them in bulk, especially for older galleries.

For example, SmugMug added the "Hello World!" setting. Great setting, and one I'm like to apply to all my old galleries. But wait, I have to go through each gallery one by one, check the settings, and apply new ones. I wish I could list every gallery in a big table, look down the column for "Hello World!", and see in an instant exactly which galleries have that feature on or off. Or tick every box in every gallery right down the column in less than one second.

This would be a great addition! Its easy to miss some of those radio buttons!!

[BigAl]

I may even look into flash and cut my teeth on that :dunnoPlease noooo. Some of us hate flash :puke I like SmugBrowser as it is :thumb

[WilliamClark77]

I hid a little Easter egg on the site for users taking the free trial, with an offer: if they let me call them and ask how it's going with their trial, I give them a $25 Amazon gift certificate. So far I've made about 30 calls.

No offense to you who have used the system for awhile and are willing to speak up, but you tend to be more advanced. I was trying to get inside the head of less advanced people who won't talk to us because they get stuck and we make them feel dumb (even though we're the dummies if we're confusing them).

Anyway, what's coming through loud and clear they love the quality of the display, the way photos fill the screen, themes, the variety of uploaders, etc., but we're foiling them by hiding the photo tools and control panel, and not being clear about which does what.

So I'm afraid we're guilty as charged for this review.

It has our complete attention, however, and we're working on it. But it's a big job and we have things to finish that we're working on now, so we're not going to be able to rush out a quick fix.

I have a feeling I'm being referenced to here. :D

As you can tell by my post count at 1 (I'm sure I'll screw something up on my first post), I just joined Dgrin and fired off my free trial of Smugmug day before yesterday; and gave the ok to call me.

The only problems I've had so far is organizing the galleries. Some of the options for how they are displayed in the categories are hard to find, or how to rearrange the gallery displays once uploaded....

I would type more but I really need to go. I'm enjoying Smugmug so far and the family type atmosphere Dgrin exudes is really nice (I've been a lurker for a month).

[DJKennedy]

I have a feeling I'm being referenced to here. :D

As you can tell by my post count at 1 (I'm sure I'll screw something up on my first post), I just joined Dgrin and fired off my free trial of Smugmug day before yesterday; and gave the ok to call me.

The only problems I've had so far is organizing the galleries. Some of the options for how they are displayed in the categories are hard to find, or how to rearrange the gallery displays once uploaded....

I would type more but I really need to go. I'm enjoying Smugmug so far and the family type atmosphere Dgrin exudes is really nice (I've been a lurker for a month).

Welcome to Smugmug/Dgrin !!

[com3]

I may even look into flash and cut my teeth on that :dunno


nnnnnooooooooooooooooooooo!!! *cries*

[DJ-S1]

Ooh, wow, a review on a blog! You're not allowed to have a blog unless you're really, really smart. So I guess this review must be right!I love sarcasm, use it all the time. I don't think it's called for in this case.

I never claimed it was from the NYT. The fact is that any review, be it from a random blog or not, can have valid points. I wanted to mention the negative comments that were made in the review because the folks who run Smugmug crave input so they can make their product better. Even a devout Smug-Hugger like myself can see that some of the reviewer's points have some merit.

Open discussion is what continues to make Smugmug the best photo site there is. They are not perfect, they know it, and they strive to do better every day.

[Ric Grupe]

I love sarcasm, use it all the time. I don't think it's called for in this case.

I never claimed it was from the NYT. The fact is that any review, be it from a random blog or not, can have valid points.

Well...the blogger did choose FLICKR!!! :puke

I wish she had said that at the beginning of the post...so I could have skipped reading the rest.:rofl

[DJ-S1]

Well...the blogger did choose FLICKR!!! :puke
:lol3

[Baldy]

I never claimed it was from the NYT.I haven't spoken to David Pogue, the tech journalist who works for the New York Times, in years, but last I did he didn't seem to think the way photos look online was a big deal. His feeling was that most consumers don't care about how the galleries look, just whether it's easy and free.

[I Simonius]

- arranging photos in galleries - too hard and takes too long (mainly for large galleries).
- deleting photos, either one at a time or bulk - takes too long even to delete 1 photo.
- updating or adding keywords - takes forever sometimes. "saving keywords" on the screen for like 30 seconds or more. Just seems like that should be a fairly simple thing to do and not take so long.

So I guess for me it comes down to the convenience issues. Just little nickel and dime petty stuff that over time aggravates the poo out of you. I've been reworking my galleries the last few days and teh arranging photos, deleting photos and keyword issues are the things that I keep coming back to as minor points of aggravation.



I have spent the better part of today moving and rearranging my site and - well - it has take me the better part of the day - nuff said:wink

[I Simonius]

No offense to you who have used the system for awhile and are willing to speak up, but you tend to be more advanced. I was trying to get inside the head of less advanced people who won't talk to us because they get stuck and we make them feel dumb (even though we're the dummies if we're confusing them).



ask me anything- call me anytime - I am definitelya dummie - everything confuses me and it takes an age to get my head around, only to find Ive forgotten it next time I come to it ( usuallyu a month or two later):wink

[Richard]

I just noticed this thread, and have to agree that there is room for improvement in Smugmug's gallery maintenance toolkit.
It would be nice if there were bulk options for adding GPS to a selected group of pics, for example. I don't use GPS because data entry is too tedious.
It is also tedious to make a pic appear in more than one gallery. You have to make a copy, then move it, and you have to do this one pic at a time. Then, if you decide to edit the pic, you have to replace each and every copy one at a time.
The biggest single issue I have is that there is no comprehensive WYSIWYG tool to arrange an entire gallery. The arrange photos displays do not give you any feedback on what the gallery will look like if there are x number of rows of thumbs in the gallery, so you actually need to keep count of the position. Meh. The in-gallery drag and drop is buggy--pics sometimes mysteriously move to a different page--and there is no way (that I know of) to drag a pic to a different page in the gallery.The first point should be trivial to fix--I notice that there is finally a bulk delete option :thumb, and this shouldn't be any harder.

The second, well, that depends on the design of the database, I suppose. Since this issue has been discussed for a long time, I'm guessing that there must be dragons there. Nevertheless, I'm sure that something could be done to make this easier.

The last point will require the most thought and effort, given the ever-increasing variation in what a gallery can look like. On the other hand, it is probably the most important thing Smugmug could do to improve my experience as a user.

Regards,

[I Simonius]

It is also tedious to make a pic appear in more than one gallery. You have to make a copy, then move it, and you have to do this one pic at a time. Then, if you decide to edit the pic, you have to replace each and every copy one at a time.

exactly the point I made a while back when I suggested a button for 'copy to' i.e. makes a copy to a specified destination gallery:wink
(getting a second plug in here:D )


The biggest single issue I have is that there is no comprehensive [I]WYSIWYG tool to arrange an entire gallery.

Couldn't agree more - it takes forever if you decide just to make one change to all galleries .. and no Smugbrowser is not the answer, it takes us outside the(familar) environment, is not intuitive either and just adds another cog to the wheel

[DJ-S1]

.. and no Smugbrowser is not the answer, it takes us outside the(familar) environment, is not intuitive either and just adds another cog to the wheelI agree Smugbrowser as it is currently is not the answer. However I believe that a desktop resident program IS one potential answer, and upgrades to Smugbrowser could be that.

I see the program as being an "offline" version of your site, getting the benefits of that offline status: speed and the ability to do "what if's" with your site design without actually committing the changes until you are ready. When everything is perfect you hit the "Sync" button and upload the changes in one shot.

Just dreaming here...but it would be sweet! :wink

[I Simonius]

I agree Smugbrowser as it is currently is not the answer. However I believe that a desktop resident program IS one potential answer, and upgrades to Smugbrowser could be that.

I see the program as being an "offline" version of your site, getting the benefits of that offline status: speed and the ability to do "what if's" with your site design without actually committing the changes until you are ready. When everything is perfect you hit the "Sync" button and upload the changes in one shot.

Just dreaming here...but it would be sweet! :wink

recipe for disaster AFAIC, one extra step of 'virtualness' too many

I have the same problem with Adobe LightRoom, it gets confusing differentaiting what is actually on the harddrive and what is a 'virtual copy'

I would much prefer something that actually directly affects the galleries in real time:wink

[paulbrock]

Interesting...I've recently started using flickr as well and compared to SM it's VERY intuitive. The Organizr is great and much easier to use than the SM tools, plus mapping seems to be nicer on flickr (no darn 150 limit, + the ability to bring up a map and see the photos in that area, which SM struggles with).

Having said that SM is definitely my primary site, Flickr is for photo sharing/amateurs (and is a little too 'cute' for my liking), SM is for professional display of images. :D

[DJ-S1]

I would much prefer something that actually directly affects the galleries in real time:winkNot that I have any inside info, but I'm sure that's what they are working on. Which is why I keep bringing up the desktop version idea; I think having both options available would be great - :thumb

[Foton]

I love SmugMug but I also find the organization really complicated and non-intuitive.

For example, the way bulk-settings is implemented is to me very confusing. I would like an own settings page where I can edit, add, compare and delete my different quick-settings. To my knowledge the only way to change and edit them now is when using them for a real album. I'd much rather have an own page in the Control Panel where quick-settings can be edited.


Also, this suggestion was really good:

While it's on my mind...speaking of bogging down, one thing SmugMug needs is a spreadsheet view of the settings in every gallery in an account. As the settings multiply, it becomes harder to view and change them in bulk, especially for older galleries.

For example, SmugMug added the "Hello World!" setting. Great setting, and one I'm like to apply to all my old galleries. But wait, I have to go through each gallery one by one, check the settings, and apply new ones. I wish I could list every gallery in a big table, look down the column for "Hello World!", and see in an instant exactly which galleries have that feature on or off. Or tick every box in every gallery right down the column in less than one second.

I have the same problem at the moment, I want to set "ext. links" to NO on all my albums without chaning any other settings for them. If I just do a bulk quick settings I guess all the settings will be the same for all albums.

One sugggestion on how to solve this (if the spreadsheet idea is too complicated) is to make it possible to create quick-settings with options set as "not defined". As in if I apply a certain quick-settings onto an album it will only change the options explicitly changed in the quick-settings and leave the rest unchanged. In my example I'd just create a quick-setting called "No ext. links" with that option set to NO and all others as "not defined" and then run that quick-setting on all albums.

And one last (minor) thing: Is it possible to remove the pre-configured categories? I don't need 20 categories that I'll never use in the list. If there isn't any way to remove them, maybe there could be an option in the control panel to hide all pre-configured categories.

[I Simonius]

I love SmugMug but I also find the organization really complicated and non-intuitive.


Mee too! But IO assume that's because I use Macs :wink :noob

[denisegoldberg]

...I have the same problem at the moment, I want to set "ext. links" to NO on all my albums without chaning any other settings for them.
You can easily do changes like this with SmugBrowser, available in this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47484&highlight=smugbrowser.

--- Denise

[Foton]

You can easily do changes like this with SmugBrowser, available in this thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=47484&highlight=smugbrowser.

--- Denise

Thanks, I tried SmugBrowser about a year ago but guess I should try it again.

Still, I don't think you should have to rely on a 3rd party application to organize your albums and their settings.

[Andy]

Thanks, I tried SmugBrowser about a year ago but guess I should try it again.

Still, I don't think you should have to rely on a 3rd party application to organize your albums and their settings.
SmugBrowser is actually built and maintained by a SmugMug Developer :thumb

[I Simonius]

SmugBrowser is actually built and maintained by a SmugMug Developer :thumb

I tried it too and hate top say it bit didn't like it (sorry :cry )

hey you're not supposed to be back yet!;-)

[DianaPricePhoto]

I hid a little Easter egg on the site for users taking the free trial, with an offer: if they let me call them and ask how it's going with their trial, I give them a $25 Amazon gift certificate. So far I've made about 30 calls.

No offense to you who have used the system for awhile and are willing to speak up, but you tend to be more advanced. I was trying to get inside the head of less advanced people who won't talk to us because they get stuck and we make them feel dumb (even though we're the dummies if we're confusing them).

Anyway, what's coming through loud and clear they love the quality of the display, the way photos fill the screen, themes, the variety of uploaders, etc., but we're foiling them by hiding the photo tools and control panel, and not being clear about which does what.

So I'm afraid we're guilty as charged for this review.

It has our complete attention, however, and we're working on it. But it's a big job and we have things to finish that we're working on now, so we're not going to be able to rush out a quick fix.

I'm on the free trial, amd I want the easter egg! :wow

[aerialphoto]

I'll add my $.02 to the "review" portion of the thread, just for the heck of it. There are a few little tweaks here and there that can be done to make everything just a little better...what's more important is that the smugmug folks have consistently and constantly worked to improve everything based on customer suggestions and needs. Quite awhile ago I decided to go with a SM competitor because I thought their basic layout looked better and worked faster than SM. When I signed up (in 2006) they promised the ability to customize sites. They're still saying that is "coming soon".

Contrast that to smugmug that will quickly offer add-ons, hacks, mods, and flat out upgrades to the system on a constant basis - and then offer a forum like this one that often has answers to questions around the clock.

Anybody comparing the different services needs to go beyond the initial glitter and discover the real possibilities and value in the various products.

[I Simonius]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=4799600&postcount=227

do you guys know tis thread.. linked post a bit anti...:cry

[Baldy]

I'm on the free trial, amd I want the easter egg! :wowHahaha, it was fun while it lasted! I actually got more requests for calls than I could make and it didn't take long to get to the thing that everyone said on every call: make organizing more intuitive!

I did love making the calls and loved the feedback, but now we have to be fixing.

[Andy]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=4799600&postcount=227

do you guys know tis thread.. linked post a bit anti...:cry
Posted, thanks Simon :thumb