HTYP talk:2005-12 Discussion about image uploads

from HTYP, the free directory anyone can edit if they can prove to me that they're not a spambot
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Usage Notes

  • To receive email notifications when this page is updated:
    1. In your user preferences, check the box next to "Send me an email on page changes" in the "Email" box on your "User data" options page
    2. "watch" this page (in the default skin, click on the [watch] tab at top; may be elsewhere in other skins)
  • To add a new entry, click the [+] tab at top (in the default skin).

User Questions

  • (TC) And I don't remember how to insert an extra tab / create a sublist / whatever it's called these days in wiki.
    • (W) See here (new page created to answer this question ^_^ )

2005-12-21 16:49 from Woozle

Heya Tim (or is it Pam Winton using Tim's account?) -- let me know if you're having difficulty with the images. Cheers! --Woozle 16:49, 21 December 2005 (EST)

2005-12-22 17:43 from Tdcrone

<was almost an e-mail>


So, after leaving them to sit patiently for what, three months now, I started to upload the Pinecrest scrapbook pictures yesterday... only to watch the server crash terribly and painfully shortly after.

First, I uploaded a .zip of two of the pictures (01 and 02). It didn't appear to be accepted (even into the recent files list) so I uploaded just the first picture as a PNG. Still no joy.

Then the server was dead, with the SQL error that I'm sure you know since it's fixed now.

I haven't tried .tar.gz, and seeing as how it's only a few dozen pictures it's probably not really worth the trouble save to know if it works; I can just use one of the backend tools to iteratively load them, if you think it'll be all right. I'm also on a commercial but low-bandwidth host now, so I could really host them if you'd prefer that.

- On another note, would you notice if I used your talk page? I'm sending this through Yoohoo%!? since my home computer doesn't seem to like sshd running anymore, but the talk page would probably be more appropriate.

<Since you posted to my talk page before I could send this, I'll avoid the old RFCs this way. :)>

- Finally, Outlook doesn't hang up when the connection's gone...

2005-12-22 17:54 Further information

So I dug up a real browser (i.e. not IE, aiee!), and get the ever-stimulating "Connection closed by remote server" dialog after each upload.

Any clues?

Thanks ->Tim

2005-12-23 09:02 from Woozle

Got your message. Not sure what's up; I recently installed an anti-spam extension, which seems to be working, and I don't think that should be affecting the uploading ability... but I'm out of town right now, on a dial-up, and not really equipped to check.

You'll probably need to upload files in their destination format, i.e. jpg or png (gif also should work, but for any given gif, png is usually smaller). I can configure the software to accept additional formats, but I don't think it would be able to show them as anything except a downloadable binary (i.e. you can't upload a bunch of images as a .tar.gz and have them automatically unzip, afaik, though I should remember to ask if this is feature is in the works because it would be quite useful).

I will try to remember to test uploads this weekend, after I get back; feel free to leave another message to remind me.

Cheers! --Woozle 09:07, 23 December 2005 (EST)

2005-12-29 21:55 "Uploading?" from Tdcrone

I don't see any recently uploaded files... any status? :)

Thanks, -Tim

Editor's Note

I seem to remember that my message below was in response to the one above, despite the timestamps, but maybe I'm confusing the above message with a different one. --Woozle 08:45, 30 December 2005 (EST)

2005-12-29 17:09 from Woozle

Got your message -- I just tried uploading a file and had no problems. Do you want to email me the file you're trying to upload and I'll try that? --Woozle 17:09, 29 December 2005 (EST)

2005-12-30 01:14 from Tdcrone

The first one is:


Fortunately I never bothered to set a max size, each file is aroung 10MB.

It occurs to me that perhaps the size is the matter...

Thanks, -Tim

Editor's Note

Ok, the timestamp is definitely wrong here; the next message is in response to this one. --Woozle

2005-12-29 21:38 ok, yes, there's still a problem

I created a much smaller version of the file (200k) and was able to upload it, but this new server we're on now (as of about 2 days ago) is much more strict about security and they've turned off some stuff to which MediaWiki needs access in order to resize images... so the raw image is there, but all the resized versions are broken. I'm waiting for the sysadmin who knows of these things to get back from a funeral so we can work something out; hopefully sometime this weekend. Meantime, remind me to set up an FTP account so you can just upload things without going through the wiki (too close to bed time at the moment). --Woozle 21:38, 29 December 2005 (EST)

OT: Timestamp issues

Not really on topic, but I neglected to set my time zone so all my times are +5 (i.e. 12:00 should be 7:00). Based on this post, it appears to be fixed. Sorry... :)

2005-12-30 15:57 FTP site

(Ahh yeah, probably your timestamps all said (GMT) and I just didn't notice...)

I've set up an FTP site where you can put large image files. It has several GB of spare room, and I'll be clearing out more as soon as some stuff finishes downloading.

  • server:
  • user: twinftp
  • pass: guest

We'll just use that for transferring large files for now, i.e. it won't be where the files actually live (for one thing, it's not accessible from http); eventually I'll set up something more permanent, if it seems like it would be useful.

Also, the server sysop has turned off the security restriction which was preventing image uploads from working properly, but I'm still having trouble with them; looking at this now. --Woozle 15:16, 30 December 2005 (EST)

'16:25 update: Ok, the image upload problem seems to be fixed -- but I'll be happy to keep taking raw PNG files and webifying them so you're not doing all the work. :-)

2006-01-01 14:48 UTC from Tdcrone

I'll upload the "orginals" to the FTP site. If you want, I can use imagemagick's convert tool to change the file sizes to something more useful and upload those as well, it's really quite painless since it's all command line.


2006-01-01 10:20

No need to do the resizing; I prefer to tweak the images by hand for web display, to improve the lighting and such. MediaWiki uses ImageMagick to produce the smaller-sized images, too. (That was part of the uploading problem earlier...) --Woozle 10:22, 1 January 2006 (EST)

2006-01-01 10:45

FTP'ing now, let me know if anything goes awry. Thanks! -- Tim 10:45, 1 January 2006 (EST)

Upload complete?

I think all the scrapbook photos uploaded successfully.

This leaves three classes of images that I haven't uploaded: 1) The yearly gathering invitations, these are small enough (and black and white) that I'll load them straight to the wiki; 2) The phone lists and vendor recommendations, which I think should be behind a password somewhere. Both would be perfect for a wiki, but I wouldn't want a vendor to get annoyed that they were panned in public. :) 3) A big newspaper clipping that I need to stitch together. Do you know of any decent stitching software? It needs to work both NS and EW, since the clipping is 12x14ish and my scanner is not.

Thanks a lot! -Tim

Image thumbnail flow?

Is there some way to make thumbnailed images flow left-to-right? I'd like the thumb format (at least the caption) on the invitations, but using plain "thumb" of course they scroll down the far right of the page. Hopefully this is pretty easy. :)

image thumbnail flow

if you use something like "150px" instead of "thumb", then MediaWiki will spit out an <img> tag instead of a table with an image in it. This allows images to flow/wrap naturally (tables do not flow, in html; images do) -- but unfortunately you lose the caption display (although any caption you enter will appear as a hover-over comment on the image, so it's not a total loss). Substitute your preferred thumbnail width for "150".

I think I've got that right.

(I do wish the syntax would allow height instead of width, as this would make the images align much more nicely; when I get a chance, this is something I will look into hacking as I can't believe it would be all that difficult.)

Sorry I've been slack about processing the other images; life calls. Will get to it in increments as time permits. --Woozle 12:33, 17 January 2006 (EST)

Okay, that's what I feared. I had (rather arbitrarily) used 200px, but I miss the thumbnail captions.

Anyway, you better rush out and catch that life before it gets away. I'll sit back and do my "real" work flipping bits. :)

Thanks, -TC