X3 Photo Gallery Support Forums
Why double? You upload once into the folder where you assign gallery>slideshow+intro, and that's it.ed_f wrote:what I really meant is that images have to be uploaded double (copy+paste has the same result), which wasn't neccesary in koken with the mentioned feature.
Sure, although I am struggling to see how this affects standard hosting services which normally offer 100 GB with the cheapest option. 100 GB can easily cover 1-200,000 images.ed_f wrote:with most (like mine) hoster-contracts volume DOES make a difference, open end IS more expensive.
Indeed! It's just not a feature in X3, and normally space is not an issue for most websites.ed_f wrote:that is one reason why a double-/triple-language version of photo-gallery without just copying everything would be so nice!
You can share the same gallery source images for an index-slideshow and a gallery elsewhere. You can't select SOME images into your index-slideshow from one gallery then some from another and then some from a third. The simplicity of it (and X3 galleries in general), is that it pulls all it's images from a folder, where it would be logical and easy to group them for your slideshow. Sure it sounds nice if you can select different images from different folders to go into a single slideshow-gallery, but also sounds a bit tedious. Point taken, but in X3, a gallery (whatever layout) is simply created from the images in a folder, thus it is entirely dynamic also when you upload/delete items.ed_f wrote:to use an image in an index-slideshow AND in a gallery elsewhere on my site it needs to be uploaded double - if I understand it right. or do I still miss something?
No more tedious than creating that same selection outside of X3 and then uploading it. I'd argue the latter is more work ;) (Edit: I realize you can also do the selection in X3 by copying the images to a new folder. But that's still quite a lot of clicking.)mjau-mjau wrote: Sure it sounds nice if you can select different images from different folders to go into a single slideshow-gallery, but also sounds a bit tedious.
I had an idea about that. You know I have only basic knowledge about the technical site, but maybe it's worth a thought: Would it be possible to assign images from folder A to folder B by only putting a reference (symlink?) into folder B?mjau-mjau wrote:Point taken, but in X3, a gallery (whatever layout) is simply created from the images in a folder, thus it is entirely dynamic also when you upload/delete items.
From a user's perspective, yeah. Technically this would be very different because koken was based on a database.ed_f wrote: I guess the latter would be what the "mark as featured" feature in koken was. and what I meant.
koken: Es gibt einen Ordner mit allen Bildern und in der Datenbank steht, welches Bild in welches Album gehört. Deshalb kann man auch einfach sagen, dass ein Bild in mehrere Alben gehören soll.ed_f wrote: könntest du in wenigen worten einem laien mitteilen, was der unterschied ist zum hiesigen? jedenfalls war es schließlich der zusammenbruch der koken-database, die eine neuanfertigung nötig machte, schade, aber hier ist's nun besser. danke!
Indeed, and that would probably work already now. However, it doesn't seem practical for the same reasons as noted above: Once you move/rename any files or paths that the symlinks point to, the symlinks will fail, and X3 can't manage such abstraction. You would have to create the symlinks manually, and surely that would require browsing/searching multiple folders to get the paths, essentially just to save storage space. Symlinks wouldn't benefit browser-cache, since the url's will be different, just pointing to the same file on server. Excellent thinking however :clap: Perhaps a concept that can be used in the future with some planning ...metallissimus wrote:I had an idea about that. You know I have only basic knowledge about the technical site, but maybe it's worth a thought: Would it be possible to assign images from folder A to folder B by only putting a reference (symlink?) into folder B?
Maybe X4 will be able to do that? I can only guess that it might be possible to implement some kind of watching mechanism that detects changes and can rewrite the symlinks correspondingly.mjau-mjau wrote: Once you move/rename any files or paths that the symlinks point to, the symlinks will fail, and X3 can't manage such abstraction.
In terms of X4 (or next-gen X3), I could write a lot. There is definitely room for huge improvements in how X3 stores images and data on a per-folder basis. For example, the following is feasible (although not without some complications):metallissimus wrote:Maybe X4 will be able to do that? I can only guess that it might be possible to implement some kind of watching mechanism that detects changes and can rewrite the symlinks correspondingly.