Images on SmugMug

John Navas wrote:
On 14 Dec 2008 00:59:28 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On 13 Dec 2008 07:14:59 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:

For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy

And spend a whole lot more time setting it up and maintaining it.

Gallery2 setup took me no more than a couple of hours,

Who cares how long it took _you_? It's still a lot more work.

It's not a lot more work.

Yes, it is. Smugmug? Upload the file. About 20 seconds of work for
me as opposed to "a couple of hours" for you.

--
Ray Fischer

Ray Fischer wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On 14 Dec 2008 00:59:28 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On 13 Dec 2008 07:14:59 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy
And spend a whole lot more time setting it up and maintaining it.
Gallery2 setup took me no more than a couple of hours,
Who cares how long it took _you_? It's still a lot more work.
It's not a lot more work.

Yes, it is. Smugmug? Upload the file. About 20 seconds of work for
me as opposed to "a couple of hours" for you.


Smug mug has many benefits that a self hosted Gallery2 installation
doesn't have. The most notable I find is how the 3rd party free add-on
to windows explorer lets you locate a file on your hard drive and upload
just that as if it were being moved or copied to different folder or do
it with the whole folder full of images for that matter.

You can also use Photoshop Lightroom or Adobe bridge to copy files to
smug mug. I know you can get a *******ised FTP application running under
Java for Gallery uploads but it doesn't quite work as smoothly.

I still believe using JAlbum and Foto Player skin is the answer for
selling your photos. I've been using it for nearly a year. I can simply
password protect the directory the images are in or provide public access.

A list of sizes and prices drop down for buyers and because it is not a
php creation, the index page is easy to place keywords and phrases in,
not just the header so Google can rank the gallery higher in it listings.

If I had to choose between self hosting and the subsequent web site I'd
end up creating for it and Smug mug, I'd go for Smug mug every time.
What I wouldn't do is use Smug mug to sell my photos!

On 14 Dec 2008 03:24:56 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On 14 Dec 2008 00:59:28 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
On 13 Dec 2008 07:14:59 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:

For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy

And spend a whole lot more time setting it up and maintaining it.

Gallery2 setup took me no more than a couple of hours,

Who cares how long it took _you_? It's still a lot more work.

It's not a lot more work.

Yes, it is.

OK -- it's a lot more work for someone like you, but not a lot more work
for someone like me.

Smugmug? Upload the file. About 20 seconds of work for
me as opposed to "a couple of hours" for you.

Which is fine if you're satisfied with a default setup. That would cut
my time with Gallery2 down to a couple of minutes, all it takes to
install the default configuration. The couple more hours is to fine
tune it just the way I want it (inc. on my own domain), something I just
couldn't do at SumgMug. "Different strokes for different folks."
--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:51:07 +1000, Jurgen wrote
in :

John Navas wrote:
For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy

Smug mug has many benefits that a self hosted Gallery2 installation
doesn't have. The most notable I find is how the 3rd party free add-on
to windows explorer lets you locate a file on your hard drive and upload
just that as if it were being moved or copied to different folder or do
it with the whole folder full of images for that matter.

You can also use Photoshop Lightroom or Adobe bridge to copy files to
smug mug. I know you can get a *******ised FTP application running under
Java for Gallery uploads but it doesn't quite work as smoothly.

Gallery Remote is a slick tool that works very well, neither
"*******ized" nor an "FTP application", that I personally prefer to
Adobe Bridge.

I still believe using JAlbum and Foto Player skin is the answer for
selling your photos. I've been using it for nearly a year. I can simply
password protect the directory the images are in or provide public access.

A list of sizes and prices drop down for buyers and because it is not a
php creation, the index page is easy to place keywords and phrases in,
not just the header so Google can rank the gallery higher in it listings.

I can easily do all that and much more with Gallery2.

If I had to choose between self hosting and the subsequent web site I'd
end up creating for it and Smug mug, I'd go for Smug mug every time.
What I wouldn't do is use Smug mug to sell my photos!

"Different strokes for different folks." But at least be fair and
accurate in your comparisons. Or do you simply lack experience with
Gallery2?
--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/]

Blinky the Shark wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:

John Navas wrote:
On 12 Dec 2008 20:06:43 GMT, Allodoxaphobia
wrote in :

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:30:00 -0500, Cynicor wrote:

The only thing I'd like is the ability to come up with shorter URLs.
So instead of
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/galler...34836045_QVwYs,
it might be http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/gallery/Antiques#Bedpost
or something similar.
You can always plug it into tinyurl.com. Once you have your tinyurl,
it's good f o r e v e r -- how ever long _that_ is. :-)
I prefer notlong.com, because it allows you to customize the link.
There are also some of us who won't click a shortlink- or even a long
one- if the poster's creds are unknown or in doubt. But the tinyURLs
are more suspect than the ones that are apparent.
So let tiny drop a cookie on you that says you prefer to see a page that
shows what the long link is and asks you if you want to go there. Then
no more fears, warranted or unwarranted. See their page for
instructions.

Also, for those who may not know it, if you include "preview" in a tiny
url you make, *any* user that clicks it will be shown that page that
tells you what the original link is and lets you decide if you want to
go there. Use this form: http://preview.tinyurl.[the rest of short
link]
Don't see how any of this helps if you don't care to view a pile of dog
****, thumb size or other... Thanks to "Rita", now "Larry Thong", I don'
play dat.

Well, then think a little. If you can see the original link, you might
glean enough information to make a better call than if you don't know it.

Not if it's a link to a flikr or smugmug etc. gallery; that doesn't tell
me anything. I thought someone had said some of these give a thumbnail
of the image before taking you to the actual site when, if and as you
click on the URL of same.

It's no biggie anyway; you either trust certain people or you don't.

--
john mcwilliams

John Navas wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
John Navas wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
John Navas wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote in
John Navas wrote:

For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy

And spend a whole lot more time setting it up and maintaining it.

Gallery2 setup took me no more than a couple of hours,

Who cares how long it took _you_? It's still a lot more work.

It's not a lot more work.

Yes, it is.

OK -- it's a lot more work for someone like you, but not a lot more work
for someone like me.

Oooo! Condescending too!

Smugmug? Upload the file. About 20 seconds of work for
me as opposed to "a couple of hours" for you.

Which is fine if you're satisfied with a default setup. That would cut
my time with Gallery2 down to a couple of minutes, all it takes to

If I wanted to design and build web pages then I would be in a
different line of work. One that doesn't pay as well.

The couple more hours is to fine
tune it just the way I want it (inc. on my own domain), something I just
couldn't do at SumgMug.

You have your hobby. You like to designe web pages. Fine.

To insist that your way is best for everybody is just arrogant
stupidity.

--
Ray Fischer

John McWilliams wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:

John Navas wrote:
On 12 Dec 2008 20:06:43 GMT, Allodoxaphobia
wrote in :

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:30:00 -0500, Cynicor wrote:

The only thing I'd like is the ability to come up with shorter
URLs. So instead of
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/galler...34836045_QVwYs,
it might be http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/gallery/Antiques#Bedpost
or something similar.
You can always plug it into tinyurl.com. Once you have your
tinyurl, it's good f o r e v e r -- how ever long _that_ is.
:-)
I prefer notlong.com, because it allows you to customize the link.
There are also some of us who won't click a shortlink- or even a long
one- if the poster's creds are unknown or in doubt. But the tinyURLs
are more suspect than the ones that are apparent.
So let tiny drop a cookie on you that says you prefer to see a page
that shows what the long link is and asks you if you want to go there.
Then no more fears, warranted or unwarranted. See their page for
instructions.

Also, for those who may not know it, if you include "preview" in a
tiny url you make, *any* user that clicks it will be shown that page
that tells you what the original link is and lets you decide if you
want to go there. Use this form: http://preview.tinyurl.[the rest of
short link]
Don't see how any of this helps if you don't care to view a pile of dog
****, thumb size or other... Thanks to "Rita", now "Larry Thong", I
don' play dat.

Well, then think a little. If you can see the original link, you might
glean enough information to make a better call than if you don't know
it.

Not if it's a link to a flikr or smugmug etc. gallery; that doesn't tell
me anything. I thought someone had said some of these give a thumbnail of
the image before taking you to the actual site when, if and as you click
on the URL of same.

Gotcha. I was thinking of the Bigger Usenet Picture, not just gallery
links in photo groups. From the larger perspective, most people who fear
links are trying to avoid porn sites; in that scenario knowing the
original link would frequently be a useful tool in helping one to
avoid those places.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

On 14 Dec 2008 19:02:22 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:

OK -- it's a lot more work for someone like you, but not a lot more work
for someone like me.

Oooo! Condescending too!

On the contrary -- just taking you at your word. That it's a lot more
work for you doesn't mean that it's a lot more work for me.

Which is fine if you're satisfied with a default setup. That would cut
my time with Gallery2 down to a couple of minutes, all it takes to

If I wanted to design and build web pages then I would be in a
different line of work. One that doesn't pay as well.

No design required -- you're clearly unfamiliar with Gallery2, and thus
shouldn't presume to judge it -- page layout is done with ready made
templates and easy configuration settings in a user-friendly control
panel.

The couple more hours is to fine
tune it just the way I want it (inc. on my own domain), something I just
couldn't do at SumgMug.

You have your hobby. You like to designe web pages. Fine.

Nope.

To insist that your way is best for everybody is just arrogant
stupidity.

You stooping to insults concedes the debate.
--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/]

John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:51:07 +1000, Jurgen wrote
in :

John Navas wrote:
For about the same price as SmugMug you could host your own website with
theirthe Gallery2 package (and anything else you'd like to host) on GoDaddy

Smug mug has many benefits that a self hosted Gallery2 installation
doesn't have. The most notable I find is how the 3rd party free add-on
to windows explorer lets you locate a file on your hard drive and upload
just that as if it were being moved or copied to different folder or do
it with the whole folder full of images for that matter.

You can also use Photoshop Lightroom or Adobe bridge to copy files to
smug mug. I know you can get a *******ised FTP application running under
Java for Gallery uploads but it doesn't quite work as smoothly.

Gallery Remote is a slick tool that works very well, neither
"*******ized" nor an "FTP application", that I personally prefer to
Adobe Bridge.

I still believe using JAlbum and Foto Player skin is the answer for
selling your photos. I've been using it for nearly a year. I can simply
password protect the directory the images are in or provide public access.

A list of sizes and prices drop down for buyers and because it is not a
php creation, the index page is easy to place keywords and phrases in,
not just the header so Google can rank the gallery higher in it listings.

I can easily do all that and much more with Gallery2.

If I had to choose between self hosting and the subsequent web site I'd
end up creating for it and Smug mug, I'd go for Smug mug every time.
What I wouldn't do is use Smug mug to sell my photos!

"Different strokes for different folks." But at least be fair and
accurate in your comparisons. Or do you simply lack experience with
Gallery2?

I run a gallery2 site on Godaddy. I also use Jalbum on the same site
because the "shopping cart" in Gallery is broken. Has been for close to
a year and Godaddy either can't or won't fix it. Worse, they won't give
Menalto engineers access to their server to alter some settings Gallery
2 requires for cart security.

According to Godaddy, "allowing those changes poses a security risk to
our servers." I am more than fair and accurate in my assessment. You on
the other hand seem hell bent on brow beating anyone who has a differing
opinion to you. Gallery2 is a fine program if you own the server on
which it resides. It most certainly has some serious "issues" on a
shared server when it comes to it's "shopping cart".

John Navas wrote:
On 14 Dec 2008 19:02:22 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:

OK -- it's a lot more work for someone like you, but not a lot more work
for someone like me.

Oooo! Condescending too!

On the contrary -- just taking you at your word.

Don't start lying as well.

Which is fine if you're satisfied with a default setup. That would cut
my time with Gallery2 down to a couple of minutes, all it takes to

If I wanted to design and build web pages then I would be in a
different line of work. One that doesn't pay as well.

No design required -- you're clearly unfamiliar with Gallery2, and thus
shouldn't presume to judge it -- page layout is done with ready made
templates and easy configuration settings in a user-friendly control
panel.

You mean - like Smugmug?

The couple more hours is to fine
tune it just the way I want it (inc. on my own domain), something I just
couldn't do at SumgMug.

You have your hobby. You like to designe web pages. Fine.

Nope.

To insist that your way is best for everybody is just arrogant
stupidity.

You stooping to insults concedes the debate.

Then you already lost the debate when you decided to be a
condescending asshole.

--
Ray Fischer