How to use new features.

I posted my Liberty Seated type set to the gallery but the coins are not being displayed in the order in which they were added. The coins are all mixed up without any order now.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That's interesting. I have not had this problem with my gallery listings.

 

I also noticed the title for each coin is not visible only the description when viewing the coins.

 

just upload the files in the order you want them to be shown. That's all there is to it. Once you upload you can't move the photos around. So you have to do it right the first time around.

 

The photos were uploaded EXACTLY how I wanted them to appear in order but, once saved the order I put them in was changed. I am not the only one this has happened to.

 

Would using a file naming system help achieve the order you wanted? If so, try numbering your files in a consistent chronological way, for example:
1921 Peace Reverse 00.jpeg,
1921 Peace Reverse 01.jpeg,
1921 Peace Reverse 02.jpeg... and so on.

 

Can you please get this off of my site, I don't need that little red number to go up and up.

 

The manner in which I name my images is by denomination and date in numerical order. Half dimes are 05c-1837-obv.jpg, 05c-1837-rev.jpg, 05c-1838-obv.jpg, etc. through all of the denominations and even that did not keep them in the order I uploaded them in.

When I first started using Photobucket it was the same way until they got enough complaints from users not being able to keep their files in sequence they finally rewrote their software so now all the files uploaded are automatically arranged in alphanumeric order unless the user opts to organize them differently.

 

My suggestion wasn't about rearranging the manner in which you like to order the information in your file names with dates denominations and words, it was about adding a system of numbering into any file naming convention you use so that the files automatically sort by number when recognized by a computer or software that recognizes those file types. That way you can still understand which file is which from your system of dates, denominations, words you use in the name, but the added number is there for the computer to sort them.

So in your example, merely adding something like: 00-05c-1837-obv.jpg, 00-05c-1837-rev.jpg, 01-05c-1838-obv.jpg, 01-05c-1838-rev.jpg, etc. would sort them numerically and only requires minimal typing to create the order you want. The dates and abbreviations for obverse, reverse are really excess that the computer doesn't need, and are only there for your reference. So thinking of a file name that a computer uses is all that's really needed, if you have hundreds of files, you just add more "0"s from the outset.

I use Photobucket too, so I'm also familiar with the platform. What you described doing on Photobucket after they provided alphanumeric file sorting, is just a system for you the customer to use file names in a manner that you can read them and know they'll sort without doing it by number. Computers really only need numbers to do it and Photobucket is also set up to attach a URL to your individual images, which follows their protocol. Whatever we humans put in the file names is really superfluous and designed for the human side of the machine.

It's funny that we don't have a universal file naming convention the way libraries use Dewey Decimal systems. Every individual, work group, office, school and company anywhere there is a computer in use, has any number of different file naming conventions at work. It can be a hard thing to get others conformed into using them properly for a data base to operate smoothly and it's hard for people to adjust to new systems when entering a new database and starting to work within new-to-them systems. It can be downright frustrating, and that's the problem we end up facing when these online applications are not clear about how to use them.

It would be nice if there was a universal way of doing it, but the one system that always works is numbers, sometimes its applied through a numerical dating system other times it's generated chronologically by time or file count as the file is created, but it all comes down to numbers on computers as the simplest way for them to sort our stuff. Good luck with it!

 

Yes, I've used that Gallery banner picture feature and put up a picture there soo after these new features were first announced a short while back. It wasn't at all clear as to what scale the photo should be. Some parameters would help a lot of people set it up properly. The way the image is placed in the header doesn't exactly

Like many of these new features, it seems to suffer from being an "add-on" feature and not a FEATURE-feature. That is, your content isn't really up front and publicly visible (for long) for the forum members to see. One has to drill down through many tabs to find things you've uploaded. Many of these new features are redundant (very similar to each other) yet not as flexible as a simple forum thread is to accomplish much of the same goal, hosting and presenting images on the forum to share with others.

Here's an example of a problem with the Gallery banner and our existing user profile page (see pics for comparison):

It's strange that the Gallery banner picture is accessed through Gallery > My Gallery > My Albums, (that's a minimum of 3 clicks to reach it) and that it doesn't just show up on one's Profile page, or somewhere accessible when you log in to CT.

Underneath the picture banner in one's My Gallery tabs, there are a list of links in a row of black tabs with white text: Albums / Photos / Videos / Tagged Photos / Profile Page. (picture 1) These are the same set of tabs that show up on the same black strip, on your user profile page (without said My Gallery banner picture) when you click the tab hiding them, Profile > Photos. (picture 2) This tab just reveals your uploads, those photos uploaded into your albums in your gallery.

Picture 1



Picture 2


On a user's profile page the gallery banner picture doesn't show (see above, picture 2), nor is there a link to your gallery from the Profile Page, but there is a link from the Gallery to the Profile Page. (picture 1) And in the Gallery one's user Avatar is superimposed over the gallery banner pic. It really needs to be the same in both locations or redesign these features to suit one layout and one clear and simplified system of navigation.

The new features are rather a cluster(something) of distractions, certainly useable, but FAR from well integrated into the design of the forum's navigation and display. Many are buried so deep behind several clicks that they "feature" little, and are prone to going the way most aged threads and former iterations of "albums" on CT have gone, deep into archives that no one can access or gives up looking for because the archives are so poorly archived they become inaccessible. It's only a matter of time until an update of the forum software is rolled out and shakes all this up and the work you've done uploading and arranging files will be lost or forgotten.

The result is that if you want something featured, put it in a thread and keep that thread alive. Hosting images on CT may seem the best solution but the new features prevent certain uploads hosted images from other sites or restrictions on where video content must come from. It would be much better to conform to the variety of ways users wish to share information than forcing users to adopt various new ways of interacting with the site. This is why the forum threads remain the best option, are most flexible for design and simple layout, and control of how you upload images to threads.

New toys are fun for five minutes, but after that most kids play with the simple box the new toy came in. (New toy features in the old forum box.)

 

Instead of photos, could users upload embedded Youtube videos?

 

Pretty much as I was saying, the new features will fail (have failed) quickly.

The Gallery and Photos (tab on your user profile page) have already been troublesome and had to be disabled just a week or two after their introduction. Will they return only for users to find out all that they already uploaded, "had to be erased, and we're sorry for the inconvenience."...

Whatever the conflict with the software is that is causing this, it goes to show how poorly the developer designed them to integrate and work with the site and only hurts the functions use by more users. This initial problem stands to illustrate how problematic was the design and redundancy for what we could already achieve with threads.

There's no reason to take the 'live with it' attitude. That's what feedback such as this is about. If someone is buying this forum software as a product, then they should hear about it's faults or lack of user friendliness so as to improve or remove the functions under scrutiny or at the heart of other customer problems such as not being able to start new threads.