Implemented Image and Media gallery must be INTEGRATED

[Tigratrus]

Image and video gallery that is actually INTEGRATED with the forums. ALL images and video that has been uploaded should categorizable, searchable and should be EASILY organized and reused by the member. Take a look at http://www.plupload.com/ for an upload system that resizes the image ON THE WORKSTATION. This is huge, as most people don't have a clue how to resize an image and get frustrated when their 5 MB image takes forever to upload.

 

[igrec]

Please don't, keep it as a separate module. I need gallery for one of my forums to convert to XF. But the second one doesn't need it all.
Let us choose what to build on our web-sites, don't trough everything in the core.

 

[Tigratrus]

Please don't, keep it as a separate module. I need gallery for one of my forums to convert to XF. But the second one doesn't need it all.
Let us choose what to build on our web-sites, don't trough everything in the core.

Did you read my original post? I'm not saying it should be part of the core at all. Just that it should work VERY closely with the core if it's installed. Treating a gallery as a totally separate stove-piped area of user generated content vastly reduces the things that an admin can do with it, and the benefit that the gallery brings to the community in terms of facilitating the conversation between members.

James

 

[jmurrayhead]

Did you read my original post? I'm not saying it should be part of the core at all. Just that it should work VERY closely with the core if it's installed. Treating a gallery as a totally separate stove-piped area of user generated content vastly reduces the things that an admin can do with it, and the benefit that the gallery brings to the community in terms of facilitating the conversation between members.

James

This was the problem with vBulletin. Blogs were great. Albums were great. However, there was hardly any integration into the core. They went widely unnoticed.

 

[igrec]

This was the problem with vBulletin. Blogs were great. Albums were great. However, there was hardly any integration into the core. They went widely unnoticed.

InVB3 you mean? in 4th galleries come build in with very little management e.g. how many albums can a single user have etc.

Did you read my original post? I'm not saying it should be part of the core at all. Just that it should work VERY closely with the core if it's installed. Treating a gallery as a totally separate stove-piped area of user generated content vastly reduces the things that an admin can do with it, and the benefit that the gallery brings to the community in terms of facilitating the conversation between members.

James

How do you mean? I'm talking about build in, sure thing if there is something it has to work with core and be manageable from the admin part of forum. I just don't want XF to come already with galleries , blogs, calendars etc. Whoever needs it will get a module/s and install.

Otherwise pretty soon it will start to look like as a certain software, bulky and annoying where nothing has been accomplished to is logical performance.

 

[jmurrayhead]

InVB3 you mean? in 4th galleries come build in with very little management e.g. how many albums can a single user have etc.

Unnoticed in both vB3 and vB4 - very lacking in just vB4.

 

[igrec]

Unnoticed in both vB3 and vB4 - very lacking in just vB4.

There is no good management in 3th one as well. Customers were begging to have a little bit more control, it's still controlled with simple restrictions of size that usergroups can have for albums. Basically nothing stops that album hell where users to upload couple of pics are creating new album.

 

[DRE]

At such time as we offer an image and video gallery, it would be integrated as you say.

That was 2010. It's 2013. My psychic forecast says this will occur in 2015.

 

[optrex]

This was the problem with vBulletin. Blogs were great. Albums were great. However, there was hardly any integration into the core. They went widely unnoticed.

This was the same with IPB also.

I'd like the gallery to work in the same way that resources work, so you can "post a topic" this means it appears in whats new and all the comments on the photo appear as a new post would. That way members have notifications, alerts, watches topics etc as they currently do now. This makes the integration seamless and unobtrusive. It also means people will use it because they already know how it works.

 

[Jeremy]

This was the same with IPB also.

I'd like the gallery to work in the same way that resources work, so you can "post a topic" this means it appears in whats new and all the comments on the photo appear as a new post would. That way members have notifications, alerts, watches topics etc as they currently do now. This makes the integration seamless and unobtrusive. It also means people will use it because they already know how it works.

What's new needs to be easier to integrate with. IIRC, it's difficult to properly integrate. Because personally, things like galleries shouldn't be centers for discussions, so a comment system versus full fledged post should do in my mind.

 

[optrex]

What's new needs to be easier to integrate with. IIRC, it's difficult to properly integrate. Because personally, things like galleries shouldn't be centers for discussions, so a comment system versus full fledged post should do in my mind.

I get what you're saying but as a basic forum you guide everyone to "what's new" to get all the latest info on what they've missed while they've been away.
You add resources and it has the same behaviour - you check whats new
You add an events calendar, it has the same behaviour - you check whats new
You add a link directory, it has the same behavoiur - you check whats new
You add a gallery image or a comment - people can't see it in whats new, so it gets ignored. So even if its not meant as a discussion area, based on learnt behaviour it has to appear in "whats new" for consistency and integration.

 

[erich37]

Because personally, things like galleries shouldn't be centers for discussions, so a comment system versus full fledged post should do in my mind.

are you sure ?

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/food-pr0n-fantasia-revisited.45338/


Question:
What is the benefit of using a "Comments System" instead of a "Forum-thread" to discuss about images ?

 

[Jeremy]

I get what you're saying but as a basic forum you guide everyone to "what's new" to get all the latest info on what they've missed while they've been away.
You add resources and it has the same behaviour - you check whats new
You add an events calendar, it has the same behaviour - you check whats new
You add a link directory, it has the same behavoiur - you check whats new
You add a gallery image or a comment - people can't see it in whats new, so it gets ignored. So even if its not meant as a discussion area, based on learnt behaviour it has to appear in "whats new" for consistency and integration.

I agreed with you? I just think reliance on threads for these types of things isn't the best practice. Hence, the easier to integrate comment: so developers can integrate with it.

 

[Jeremy]

are you sure ?

http://xenforo.com/community/threads/food-pr0n-fantasia-revisited.45338/


Question:
What is the benefit of using a "Comments System" instead of a "Forum-thread" to discuss about images ?

Yes, I'm sure. That's also not a gallery in the sense being discussed here. I don't hace access to my test database, but there's a lot associated with an individual post. The above is also not conducive to comments on a particular image in the above example since it gets lost in pages upon pages of comments.

Comments on an image don't necessarily need full signatures, full post bit displays, etc. If you rely on a thread, you have to do serious modifications to get it styled to look like a comment versus an actual 'discussion'. Reliance on threads for comments is a down fall in design for plenty of things.

 

[Shelley]

Yes, I'm sure. That's also not a gallery in the sense being discussed here. I don't hace access to my test database, but there's a lot associated with an individual post. The above is also not conducive to comments on a particular image in the above example since it gets lost in pages upon pages of comments.

Comments on an image don't necessarily need full signatures, full post bit displays, etc. If you rely on a thread, you have to do serious modifications to get it styled to look like a comment versus an actual 'discussion'. Reliance on threads for comments is a down fall in design for plenty of things.

Agreed. Keeping it simplistic and less focus points such as sigs full messageuserinfos with all the data (bloat imo) etc etc minimal is the way. Content and images should be the focus points like you basically said and agree with this method of thinking.

 

[jmurrayhead]

Agreed. Keeping it simplistic and less focus points such as sigs full messageuserinfos with all the data (bloat imo) etc etc minimal is the way. Content and images should be the focus points like you basically said and agree with this method of thinking.

Same. The main thing is, comments are different from posts. So should be handled differently, as well.

 

[Chris D]

I've kept it simple for my gallery, and I like it.

http://xenmediagallery.com/media/5km-pb.168/

 

[Jeremy]

Agreed. Keeping it simplistic and less focus points such as sigs full messageuserinfos with all the data (bloat imo) etc etc minimal is the way. Content and images should be the focus points like you basically said and agree with this method of thinking.

Same. The main thing is, comments are different from posts. So should be handled differently, as well.

The general methodology of trying to morph things to fit every need is difficult and isn't the best. Things that revolve around discussions should use threads + posts, since they are already suited for that (Resource discussions). It would be like having resource reviews (a simple comment system) as a thread. That'd be ridiculously over the top.

 

[Forsaken]

The general methodology of trying to morph things to fit every need is difficult and isn't the best. Things that revolve around discussions should use threads + posts, since they are already suited for that (Resource discussions). It would be like having resource reviews (a simple comment system) as a thread. That'd be ridiculously over the top.

God I wish more people would stop building around threads for everything.

For some things it makes sense, for many others it just breaks the hell out of everything. It takes more work to customize a customized thread than it does to customize a new content type.

 

[Jeremy]

God I wish more people would stop building around threads for everything.

For some things it makes sense, for many others it just breaks the hell out of everything. It takes more work to customize a customized thread than it does to customize a new content type.

I hear ya.

 

[Shelley]

The general methodology of trying to morph things to fit every need is difficult and isn't the best. Things that revolve around discussions should use threads + posts, since they are already suited for that (Resource discussions). It would be like having resource reviews (a simple comment system) as a thread. That'd be ridiculously over the top.

I agreed and agree with you 100%

I think there's a time and place for full blown post areas. Gallery integration isn't one so very much agree with your method of thinking.