Can you be specific about how you use it and what's causing the problems? We want to make sure we understand the steps you're taking.
Thanks Baldy and Andy for the warm welcome Sorry my first post was a complaining one, as I am really very happy with smugmug and was going to get around to posting a 'thank-you' also... no really! It was right there on my list - just below no. 37: "Remember to call granny to say thanks for the lovely pair of socks I got for Christmas".
Basically, my photos are already resized (to 1024x768 which might be a bit big for some, but...) and processed to look as they should when viewing. I don't upload the true originals, so my 'originals' are my processed web-friendly(ish) versions.
The old way the originals was viewed worked well for me - using the all-thumbs style on my galleries and setting the prefered viewing size to 'original' I'd get a page of thumbs and upon clicking them, was brought to a new page displaying the original. I stripped away pretty much everything but the pictures and navigaitional tools (I have a power-user account) to get the pages as 'clean' as possible.
This way of viewing the original also gave me a link to the original so I could send it to people when I'd uploaded a photo they might be interested in - I can't find a way to link directly to an original version now that they are displayed with the lightbox.
(Ideally (being a control-freak) I'd like to force users to view my photos at their original size, but this isn't really that big of a deal and I can see how this functionality might cause annoyance for people browsing different galleries where the originals might be the true originals.)
...One thing that's very hard to imagine when you hate a feature and you see it being talked about on dgrin, is the people who love it are almost completely unrepresented. ...
Thanks,
Chris
I've been thinking recently how it seems that the Most represented group are the profesional photographers who use smugmug for their business, and are here on DGrin to get the most out of their sites.
The next group (and probably a majority of smugmug account holders) are photo sharers, like me, who run a smugmug account purely for sharing photos. I don't see too many other "Photo Sharers" here on DGrin. My concerns are different from most of the photographers in that I want to see and share my pictures as big and efficiently possible (the beauty of smugmug I might say), whereas photographers don't want too much of their product to be freely available.
The least represented group (and the largest) are the "average joe" users who were either invited to view pics, or stumbled onto them via google. These folks don't know what dgrin is, don't care, and if they have a problem, they go clicking somewhere else.
I like the idea of a Beta program, but probably not a "Public" one. You need a limited list of testers who will represent the above interests without the world seeing what you are up to.
I agree with Sigurd, this is how I manage my site - with resized originals at 1100 pixels wide, so I can get some control of how big I want my images to be seen.
To DavidTO - no, Lightbox can be activated by clicking on thumbs in "All thumbs" mode. First you open an image with the standard navigation page (which has the photo tools, exif, etc.). Then you choose "Originals" as the preferred size. From now on, Lightbox turns on to show Originals size images when you click on thumbs. And it is hard to get out of that mode.
I don't understand why Lightbox would be better for viewing full-resolution originals. If you wanted to download a 6-megapixel image, you'd want it in a separate popup so you can do other things with the gallery. You wouldn't be able to see the whole image on your screen anyway. However, for users who upload files resized the way they like it, Lightbox makes sense.
Interesting request, but remember, LB was not designed to be the mechanism by which you go from one pic to the next. The team will definitely consider it, thanks!
Yea I know, but I got a chance recently to see how my visitors interact with my site, and thats how they are using it! They click on the picture to see a bigger version, and once the bigger version is up, instead of closing it down to see what else is there, they just click the next button. They then have to wait for the next picture to load, possibly giving them the impression I have a slow website. Slideshow mode loads immediately...
You know what I'd REALLY like though? I'd like the lightbox to work exactly like the Slideshow in almost every way. When they click on a picture (in Smugmug mode for example), it would be GREAT if it loaded it up fullscreen for them like the slideshow does! My pictures look AMAZING that way . If clicking on a picture could somehow invoke a Slideshow request, starting with the picture they clicked on, that would be perfect. It shouldn't take up much bandwidth, it looks like the pictures are just over 100k when maximized to fullscreen. I'd set it so the slideshow would automatically be on pause (so it doesn't move to the next picture unless I tell it to) and make sure its easy to close like the lightbox.
Yea I know, but I got a chance recently to see how my visitors interact with my site, and thats how they are using it! They click on the picture to see a bigger version, and once the bigger version is up, instead of closing it down to see what else is there, they just click the next button. They then have to wait for the next picture to load, possibly giving them the impression I have a slow website. Slideshow mode loads immediately...
You know what I'd REALLY like though? I'd like the lightbox to work exactly like the Slideshow in almost every way. When they click on a picture (in Smugmug mode for example), it would be GREAT if it loaded it up fullscreen for them like the slideshow does! My pictures look AMAZING that way . If clicking on a picture could somehow invoke a Slideshow request, starting with the picture they clicked on, that would be perfect. It shouldn't take up much bandwidth, it looks like the pictures are just over 100k when maximized to fullscreen. I'd set it so the slideshow would automatically be on pause (so it doesn't move to the next picture unless I tell it to) and make sure its easy to close like the lightbox.
Possible?
This would be easier if you could just set "fullscreen" as an option when in the lightbox. Instead of loading the M or L I could set it to load up "fullscreen" as the default when they click on a picture.
This would be easier if you could just set "fullscreen" as an option when in the lightbox. Instead of loading the M or L I could set it to load up "fullscreen" as the default when they click on a picture.
Thanks for the comments, Dodge - I've moved your two posts to the LightBox Discussion Thread.
No worries, we're all over it. We simply want to thoroughly understand the issues so that any improvements we make are not knee-jerk, poorly tested or thought out.
Dunno if you were around when we redesigned SmugMug's look and introduced green font. Some of our customers curled in the fetal position because they hated it so much and to them it seemed it would threaten SmugMug's future, because who would sign up for a service with that hideous green?
I may have been around, but i dont think i noticed, so i dont think it bothered me that much . Thanks for the great response Baldy. This was precisely what I was looking to hear. I wasnt expecting some magical instant fix. In fact, I prefer a more reasoned approach, as knee-jerking almost always makes things worse.
As to the public beta, i was thinking more a semi public beta, where ask a few to a few hundred users to try something and report back on it throughout the dev period. Maybe give them a 5 dollar bonus credit or something, or just give them the satisfaction of helping. I know id volunteer even with no compensation. As i am really picky about how things work, id love to do what i can to make sure things aint broke
I havnt read all the posts below this, but I will, then maybe I'll post more, but for now, thanks again Baldy, thats what I needed to hear!
Rats. :cry Could you put in my request for that? I think if they added that, lightbox (for some) could be a replacement for scrolling through pics the old way. Cheers...Kerry
Rats. :cry Could you put in my request for that? I think if they added that, lightbox (for some) could be a replacement for scrolling through pics the old way. Cheers...Kerry
You can request it, in the features request thread. No promises though!
Lightbox jump-around
Hello all,
First, let me say I absolutely hate the lightbox viewing function. I realize that others have said the same.
The biggest annoyance is that if you maximize your viewing window (only tested in firefox) when the lightbox activates by clicking on a photo, the browser window un-maximizes causing the window to jump. This happens on both my laptop and desktop computer using the latest version of firefox. This is REALLY annoying to the point that I HATE the lightbox.
Second, woe to you if you the last photo you viewed was in original size! If you last viewed a photo at original size, then closed the lightbox, then came back later to view another photo you click, sit, and wait..... for the photo to load. What if I don't want the original sized photo to load? Shouldn’t I be able to abort the loading and select another size? But alas, my browser taken over by spinning gears.
Smugmug, please consider removing the lightbox. If it ain't broke....
Hello all,
First, let me say I absolutely hate the lightbox viewing function. I realize that others have said the same.
The biggest annoyance is that if you maximize your viewing window (only tested in firefox) when the lightbox activates by clicking on a photo, the browser window un-maximizes causing the window to jump. This happens on both my laptop and desktop computer using the latest version of firefox. This is REALLY annoying to the point that I HATE the lightbox.
Second, woe to you if you the last photo you viewed was in original size! If you last viewed a photo at original size, then closed the lightbox, then came back later to view another photo you click, sit, and wait..... for the photo to load. What if I don't want the original sized photo to load? Shouldn’t I be able to abort the loading and select another size? But alas, my browser taken over by spinning gears.
Smugmug, please consider removing the lightbox. If it ain't broke....
I too don't like the new light box. I don't understand what you were trying to accomplish by it, but I'm sure you had your reasons.
All I would request is to give us an option (per gallery perhaps?) Either use the lightbox or use the old way.
Unless the lightbox is doing something that you guys really need? Like saving bandwidth? I don't see how it would, but there might be something I'm missing.
I do want to echo similar thoughts that I've read on the forums, I love smugmug, I recommend it to many people, and I think that virtually everything you guys have done is great, the new viewing stuff is the exception. I'm sure many people do like it, so I'm not proposing you kill it, just give us the ability to remove it.
As a side note, it's very under featured, so it doesn't even fit well with the regular smugmug stuff. You can't read captions, you can't leave comments etc.
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited February 14, 2006
Hey everyone,
We're currently in maybe-improvements-to-Lightbox-will-ship-today mode as we test away. (We've been in that mode for a few days and at 1:00 last night we finally gave up on yesterday.)
What we think we're hearing from you is the way Lightbox is currently working is 95% of the issue. I've spent hours testing and can tell you that almost every complaint mentioned in these threads is fixed, or will be when we're through testing.
I think the right thing to do is decide whether Lightbox is good based on it working the best it can, rather than deciding based on the flaws it has now. One thing's for sure: the old way had no fanatical adherents but Lightbox does. People who love it are crazy about it and will shoot us if we kill it.
One feature we're testing that I have very mixed emotions about is the ability to suppress Lightbox in your customization if you have a power or pro account, paving the way for users to have very different experiences depending on whose SmugMug site they're on — and providing extra complexity for testing, customization, etc. And I think there will be a tendency to suppress it based on the early bugs it had rather than its pros/cons in version 1.1.
I think the right thing to do is decide whether Lightbox is good based on it working the best it can, rather than deciding based on the flaws it has now. One thing's for sure: the old way had no fanatical adherents but Lightbox does. People who love it are crazy about it and will shoot us if we kill it.
Hi Baldy,
As usual, thanks again for your guys service and enduring patience with us vocal users. Even though I'm an adamant hater of LB I agree it should be seen in its completed form for a full evaluation. That said, I disagree there aren't adherents to the old way. The nice thing about smugmug is that it just works. It displays photos. It lets you link to them. It is intuitive. It is a web page with photos on it. You guys have put in cute bells and whistles (particularly on the managment side of things, e.g. gallery arranging and what not) that are nice and very helpful, but from the viewers perspective it is just a website that acts like everyother. Java crap and what not doesn't kludge up the place, you don't need to download macromedia stuff, it just works. LB, while admirably avoiding some of those pitfalls, is as best I can see just eye-candy that gets in the way of the user. I'll wait for the final version before I'm really damning on that though. But bottomline, I've yet to see a rational explanation from any of the Smugmug crew as to just what the heck it is, what it is suppose to do, and how it improves the experience at all.
One feature we're testing that I have very mixed emotions about is the ability to suppress Lightbox in your customization if you have a power or pro account, paving the way for users to have very different experiences depending on whose SmugMug site they're on — and providing extra complexity for testing, customization, etc.
I understand your concerns about consistent experience as well as maintenance with a LB and non-LB option but to be a bit harsh you guys opened up that Pandora's box on yourselves - you already have that now. LB doesn't show thumbnails and has primitive navigation. In order to click on thumbnails or do much of anything a user has to close lightbox and go back to the "old" way. LB is already a totally parallel experience, and a vastly inferior one. Even if you do add all of those features to it you are still SOL with two interfaces. You guys to your great credit spent enormous amounts of effort producing a truely awesome customization sweet as well as themes and suddenly you foist a vanilla, feature-poor, non-standard alternative veiwing environment onto the site that has absolutely no relation to that. Again, what is it and what is it for and how will it fit with the rest of the very mature site? I'll wait and see what the updated LB has but my tiny little mind can not concieve of how it will overcome the massive handicap of being a suddenly parallel and non-standard viewing interface to everything that has been smugmug since its inception.
I'm sure many people adore LB, gobs of people love eye-candy and pay money for it (why else are cellphone ringtones a multi-billion dollar business). And I'm sure you're right, now that you've put it out there you'll never be able to take it away. That said, others need something that is intuitive and works and is founded on 12 years of web-standard interfaces so that passing visitors to their site don't get confused and go away. While you guys are up late testing like mad maybe you should be headed down to the internet cafe and have average web-users try it out and watch the blank stares. Don't break standards, especially if there is no articulable value-add to it.
And again, I am always amazed at the amount of work put into the service and the dedication of the smugmug team and greatly appreciate it even if I'm skeptical about this feature. Thanks again for the hard work (and the hell you take from us for it ).
the only problem I had with "the old way" was that the pop up window was not created big enough to hold the picture... (calculation did not appear to account for the scroll bars)
I've eliminated the LB by forcing my galleries to Journal (which I've customized to use Large Pics) and turned off Originals, so no LB is necessary. I just want people to easily view pics, that's why I love smugmug!
Another opinion
I just wanted to throw my opinion into the mix. I really have to agree with a number of the posts in this thread that this new feature really is less than desirable for a number of users. It's great that a number of users think it's fantastic but a growing number of users are pointing out numerous areas where improvements need to be made before this feature is ready for use across the board use at smugmug.
I don't want to rehash the same issues over again but the Firefox window shifting is plainly a real issue and my opinion is that the handling of originals with the lightbox is worse for the end user than the previous functionality.
I agree with the statement that pandora's box is now open and smugmug is now in a difficult position but I do find it annoying that my pay for site went from what I would call release quality to something that is more akin to being beta software.
I am looking foward to seeing what improvements/changes are coming in the next few days,
I've yet to see a rational explanation from any of the Smugmug crew as to just what the heck it is, what it is suppose to do, and how it improves the experience at all.
It just replaces the old popup window.
Before, when someone clicked on the medium image in smugmug style, or small in smugmug small style, a new browser window came up. You could set your preferred size but that was about it. If you watched SmugMug users use it, there was no spark, you couldn't feel the love.
Lightbox replaces the popup but it's faster, cleaner, clearer and when you watch people use it their eyes light up.
The red flag: Perhaps feature creep led to the current confusion. Had we kept it with no navigation on top, like the old popup, it probably would have been very clear. The navigation opens up the question of what it's for.
The dgrin effect: Statistically, we know that originals are not viewed by the 4 million unique visitors who visit SmugMug daily. If you were to watch people at the Internet cafe, talk to our help desk customers, or watch focus groups, you couldn't find any who view them. But we know there are some because they're here in this thread. And for them, Lightbox has had a huge downside: it doesn't load images in a progressive way. You have to wait for the whole image to appear, giving the impression that it loads slowly. Adding insult to injury, the screen went dark and gears turned.
What we're about to release does load progressively unless you have image protection turned on. If it is on, you only get progressive if viewing in Safari.
But I have to believe that people who view originals with image protection enabled is probably less than 10 of our 4 million daily visitors. Usually image protection goes with blocking originals.
My only complaint about lightbox (though Baldy's note aout feature creep may mean this has already changed) is that it was confusing that this wasn't simply to view the bigger image. I.e. a person doesn't know if they click the image again it disappears.
In Smugmug I always use the "all thumbs" view...Now I can't do that anymore - instead of links to pictures, the thumbnails have become links to Javascript.
Should be fixed now. Thanks for pointing this out and I'm sorry you had to find it.
I agree the "pop up" window was passe and a bit hokey. It did have a couple of advantages though. One being that even though you'd see a slowly scrolling image appear, you knew the pic was loading.
This should be fixed except when image protection is turned on.
Actually I would argue that using Lightbox for viewing full-resolution (megapixel) images is MUCH worse than using a popup. If someone wanted to obtain a full-size original, it would be easier to open up a popup, and let it download in that window while he browses the rest of a gallery.
It's a completely different matter if a user instead uploads his own resized images (larger than "large", but still small enough to fit in a browser). In that case Lightbox is pretty nice. Fix the Firefox resize bug, make navigation easier, and you've got a slick way to view images that nearly fill your screen (without the crappy interpolation of slideshow).
Someone, anyone, explain to me why you would want Lightbox to view 6-8 megapixel images, as you spend minutes staring at gears. At least in a popup, you can do other things, and check on the progress of the download.
Comments
Ooooohhhhhh. IE. Say no more!
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
http://nickname.smugmug.com/galleryid/1/imageid/Large for FF
and
javascript:loadLB('imageid', 'Large'); for IE.
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Thanks Baldy and Andy for the warm welcome
Basically, my photos are already resized (to 1024x768 which might be a bit big for some, but...) and processed to look as they should when viewing. I don't upload the true originals, so my 'originals' are my processed web-friendly(ish) versions.
The old way the originals was viewed worked well for me - using the all-thumbs style on my galleries and setting the prefered viewing size to 'original' I'd get a page of thumbs and upon clicking them, was brought to a new page displaying the original. I stripped away pretty much everything but the pictures and navigaitional tools (I have a power-user account) to get the pages as 'clean' as possible.
This way of viewing the original also gave me a link to the original so I could send it to people when I'd uploaded a photo they might be interested in - I can't find a way to link directly to an original version now that they are displayed with the lightbox.
(Ideally (being a control-freak) I'd like to force users to view my photos at their original size, but this isn't really that big of a deal and I can see how this functionality might cause annoyance for people browsing different galleries where the originals might be the true originals.)
I've been thinking recently how it seems that the Most represented group are the profesional photographers who use smugmug for their business, and are here on DGrin to get the most out of their sites.
The next group (and probably a majority of smugmug account holders) are photo sharers, like me, who run a smugmug account purely for sharing photos. I don't see too many other "Photo Sharers" here on DGrin. My concerns are different from most of the photographers in that I want to see and share my pictures as big and efficiently possible (the beauty of smugmug I might say), whereas photographers don't want too much of their product to be freely available.
The least represented group (and the largest) are the "average joe" users who were either invited to view pics, or stumbled onto them via google. These folks don't know what dgrin is, don't care, and if they have a problem, they go clicking somewhere else.
I like the idea of a Beta program, but probably not a "Public" one. You need a limited list of testers who will represent the above interests without the world seeing what you are up to.
:twitch
Have you checked out the "Shots" forums?
Thanks for the really valuable input, dmc!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
To DavidTO - no, Lightbox can be activated by clicking on thumbs in "All thumbs" mode. First you open an image with the standard navigation page (which has the photo tools, exif, etc.). Then you choose "Originals" as the preferred size. From now on, Lightbox turns on to show Originals size images when you click on thumbs. And it is hard to get out of that mode.
I don't understand why Lightbox would be better for viewing full-resolution originals. If you wanted to download a 6-megapixel image, you'd want it in a separate popup so you can do other things with the gallery. You wouldn't be able to see the whole image on your screen anyway. However, for users who upload files resized the way they like it, Lightbox makes sense.
Yea I know, but I got a chance recently to see how my visitors interact with my site, and thats how they are using it! They click on the picture to see a bigger version, and once the bigger version is up, instead of closing it down to see what else is there, they just click the next button. They then have to wait for the next picture to load, possibly giving them the impression I have a slow website. Slideshow mode loads immediately...
You know what I'd REALLY like though? I'd like the lightbox to work exactly like the Slideshow in almost every way. When they click on a picture (in Smugmug mode for example), it would be GREAT if it loaded it up fullscreen for them like the slideshow does! My pictures look AMAZING that way
Possible?
This would be easier if you could just set "fullscreen" as an option when in the lightbox. Instead of loading the M or L I could set it to load up "fullscreen" as the default when they click on a picture.
Thanks for the comments, Dodge - I've moved your two posts to the LightBox Discussion Thread.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I may have been around, but i dont think i noticed, so i dont think it bothered me that much
As to the public beta, i was thinking more a semi public beta, where ask a few to a few hundred users to try something and report back on it throughout the dev period. Maybe give them a 5 dollar bonus credit or something, or just give them the satisfaction of helping. I know id volunteer even with no compensation. As i am really picky about how things work, id love to do what i can to make sure things aint broke
I havnt read all the posts below this, but I will, then maybe I'll post more, but for now, thanks again Baldy, thats what I needed to hear!
-Russ
No, Sorry.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
You can request it, in the features request thread. No promises though!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Hello all,
First, let me say I absolutely hate the lightbox viewing function. I realize that others have said the same.
The biggest annoyance is that if you maximize your viewing window (only tested in firefox) when the lightbox activates by clicking on a photo, the browser window un-maximizes causing the window to jump. This happens on both my laptop and desktop computer using the latest version of firefox. This is REALLY annoying to the point that I HATE the lightbox.
Second, woe to you if you the last photo you viewed was in original size! If you last viewed a photo at original size, then closed the lightbox, then came back later to view another photo you click, sit, and wait..... for the photo to load. What if I don't want the original sized photo to load? Shouldn’t I be able to abort the loading and select another size? But alas, my browser taken over by spinning gears.
Smugmug, please consider removing the lightbox. If it ain't broke....
RTM
Ken
Hi.
I too don't like the new light box. I don't understand what you were trying to accomplish by it, but I'm sure you had your reasons.
All I would request is to give us an option (per gallery perhaps?) Either use the lightbox or use the old way.
Unless the lightbox is doing something that you guys really need? Like saving bandwidth? I don't see how it would, but there might be something I'm missing.
I do want to echo similar thoughts that I've read on the forums, I love smugmug, I recommend it to many people, and I think that virtually everything you guys have done is great, the new viewing stuff is the exception. I'm sure many people do like it, so I'm not proposing you kill it, just give us the ability to remove it.
As a side note, it's very under featured, so it doesn't even fit well with the regular smugmug stuff. You can't read captions, you can't leave comments etc.
My smugmug is http://garethlewin.smugmug.com , but there is nothing special about the way I handle my pages.
We're currently in maybe-improvements-to-Lightbox-will-ship-today mode as we test away. (We've been in that mode for a few days and at 1:00 last night we finally gave up on yesterday.)
What we think we're hearing from you is the way Lightbox is currently working is 95% of the issue. I've spent hours testing and can tell you that almost every complaint mentioned in these threads is fixed, or will be when we're through testing.
I think the right thing to do is decide whether Lightbox is good based on it working the best it can, rather than deciding based on the flaws it has now. One thing's for sure: the old way had no fanatical adherents but Lightbox does. People who love it are crazy about it and will shoot us if we kill it.
One feature we're testing that I have very mixed emotions about is the ability to suppress Lightbox in your customization if you have a power or pro account, paving the way for users to have very different experiences depending on whose SmugMug site they're on — and providing extra complexity for testing, customization, etc. And I think there will be a tendency to suppress it based on the early bugs it had rather than its pros/cons in version 1.1.
Thanks,
Baldy
As usual, thanks again for your guys service and enduring patience with us vocal users. Even though I'm an adamant hater of LB I agree it should be seen in its completed form for a full evaluation. That said, I disagree there aren't adherents to the old way. The nice thing about smugmug is that it just works. It displays photos. It lets you link to them. It is intuitive. It is a web page with photos on it. You guys have put in cute bells and whistles (particularly on the managment side of things, e.g. gallery arranging and what not) that are nice and very helpful, but from the viewers perspective it is just a website that acts like everyother. Java crap and what not doesn't kludge up the place, you don't need to download macromedia stuff, it just works. LB, while admirably avoiding some of those pitfalls, is as best I can see just eye-candy that gets in the way of the user. I'll wait for the final version before I'm really damning on that though. But bottomline, I've yet to see a rational explanation from any of the Smugmug crew as to just what the heck it is, what it is suppose to do, and how it improves the experience at all.
I understand your concerns about consistent experience as well as maintenance with a LB and non-LB option but to be a bit harsh you guys opened up that Pandora's box on yourselves - you already have that now. LB doesn't show thumbnails and has primitive navigation. In order to click on thumbnails or do much of anything a user has to close lightbox and go back to the "old" way. LB is already a totally parallel experience, and a vastly inferior one. Even if you do add all of those features to it you are still SOL with two interfaces. You guys to your great credit spent enormous amounts of effort producing a truely awesome customization sweet as well as themes and suddenly you foist a vanilla, feature-poor, non-standard alternative veiwing environment onto the site that has absolutely no relation to that. Again, what is it and what is it for and how will it fit with the rest of the very mature site? I'll wait and see what the updated LB has but my tiny little mind can not concieve of how it will overcome the massive handicap of being a suddenly parallel and non-standard viewing interface to everything that has been smugmug since its inception.
I'm sure many people adore LB, gobs of people love eye-candy and pay money for it (why else are cellphone ringtones a multi-billion dollar business). And I'm sure you're right, now that you've put it out there you'll never be able to take it away. That said, others need something that is intuitive and works and is founded on 12 years of web-standard interfaces so that passing visitors to their site don't get confused and go away. While you guys are up late testing like mad maybe you should be headed down to the internet cafe and have average web-users try it out and watch the blank stares. Don't break standards, especially if there is no articulable value-add to it.
And again, I am always amazed at the amount of work put into the service and the dedication of the smugmug team and greatly appreciate it even if I'm skeptical about this feature. Thanks again for the hard work (and the hell you take from us for it
Ken
I've eliminated the LB by forcing my galleries to Journal (which I've customized to use Large Pics) and turned off Originals, so no LB is necessary. I just want people to easily view pics, that's why I love smugmug!
I just wanted to throw my opinion into the mix. I really have to agree with a number of the posts in this thread that this new feature really is less than desirable for a number of users. It's great that a number of users think it's fantastic but a growing number of users are pointing out numerous areas where improvements need to be made before this feature is ready for use across the board use at smugmug.
I don't want to rehash the same issues over again but the Firefox window shifting is plainly a real issue and my opinion is that the handling of originals with the lightbox is worse for the end user than the previous functionality.
I agree with the statement that pandora's box is now open and smugmug is now in a difficult position but I do find it annoying that my pay for site went from what I would call release quality to something that is more akin to being beta software.
I am looking foward to seeing what improvements/changes are coming in the next few days,
David
Thanks for joining, and posting, David! Your input is really valuable.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Before, when someone clicked on the medium image in smugmug style, or small in smugmug small style, a new browser window came up. You could set your preferred size but that was about it. If you watched SmugMug users use it, there was no spark, you couldn't feel the love.
Lightbox replaces the popup but it's faster, cleaner, clearer and when you watch people use it their eyes light up.
The red flag: Perhaps feature creep led to the current confusion. Had we kept it with no navigation on top, like the old popup, it probably would have been very clear. The navigation opens up the question of what it's for.
The dgrin effect: Statistically, we know that originals are not viewed by the 4 million unique visitors who visit SmugMug daily. If you were to watch people at the Internet cafe, talk to our help desk customers, or watch focus groups, you couldn't find any who view them. But we know there are some because they're here in this thread. And for them, Lightbox has had a huge downside: it doesn't load images in a progressive way. You have to wait for the whole image to appear, giving the impression that it loads slowly. Adding insult to injury, the screen went dark and gears turned.
What we're about to release does load progressively unless you have image protection turned on. If it is on, you only get progressive if viewing in Safari.
But I have to believe that people who view originals with image protection enabled is probably less than 10 of our 4 million daily visitors. Usually image protection goes with blocking originals.
We'll see when we go live. Film at....hmmm, 11?
Baldy
nice update... I like the captions!
I found out here on DGrin that clicking on the photo cancels/exits the lightbox, that works great, but how would anyone know?
I'm glad lightbox doesn't start defaulting to Original after an Original was viewed.
Future enhancement would be to keep the "menu" visible while user scrolls right/left.
isn't that [X] more or less universally known as "close?"
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
sure, but hitting the picture is a much bigger target.... no biggie
It's a completely different matter if a user instead uploads his own resized images (larger than "large", but still small enough to fit in a browser). In that case Lightbox is pretty nice. Fix the Firefox resize bug, make navigation easier, and you've got a slick way to view images that nearly fill your screen (without the crappy interpolation of slideshow).
Someone, anyone, explain to me why you would want Lightbox to view 6-8 megapixel images, as you spend minutes staring at gears. At least in a popup, you can do other things, and check on the progress of the download.