Cannot create albums in IP.Gallery

[Joel R]

I must have the ability to create an album.  

I've requested this feature before, and now I have a good case where this function NEEDS to be put back in.  

I have images already uploaded in a wrong category, so I'd like to create an album in the right category as a placeholder.  The current move function doesn't allow me to create an album before moving, so I'm stuck.  

[svit]

Same here,

I was so desperate that I had to upload a fake image so that I could create an album, then move the needed pictures to the new album, and delete the fake image.

This really seems to have been overlooked and needs to be fixed asap please.

[Joel R]

Same here,

I was so desperate that I had to upload a fake image so that I could create an album, then move the needed pictures to the new album, and delete the fake image.

This really seems to have been overlooked and needs to be fixed asap please.

​It's ridiculous that we even need to do that.  

[Kirill N]

We should also be able to manage albums in the Admin Cp.

[不中用]

I must have the ability to create an album.  

I've requested this feature before, and now I have a good case where this function NEEDS to be put back in.  

I have images already uploaded in a wrong category, so I'd like to create an album in the right category as a placeholder.  The current move function doesn't allow me to create an album before moving, so I'm stuck.  

​.

 

I think it is excellent the way it is ..

If you want to dump pictures then that button is enough " add images " ( = plural ) ..

you can select 10 pictures and drag them in your browser .. this is just a 2 step ( think about your members how easy .. not starting with : new album? already have album? where you wanna put the album? name? description? comments?.. etc .. it's all fine to ask, but at a later stage .. after your members already are engaged uploading their images )  ..

then they have the option to create an album or add to an exciting one or no album at all >>  very important !

 

.

[Joel R]

​.I think it is excellent the way it is ..

If you want to dump pictures then that button is enough " add images " ( = plural ) ..

you can select 10 pictures and drag them in your browser .. this is just a 2 step ( think about your members how easy .. not starting with : new album? already have album? where you wanna put the album? name? description? comments?.. etc .. it's all fine to ask, but at a later stage .. after your members already are engaged uploading their images )  ..

then they have the option to create an album or add to an exciting one or no album at all >>  very important !

​You're assuming that there ARE pictures to be uploaded into an album.

We need the album to be created FIRST, to move existing photos.

[不中用]

​You're assuming that there ARE pictures to be uploaded into an album.

We need the album to be created FIRST, to move existing photos.

​.

Ah sorry  bit too quick in reading it ..

 

I did try to move the "create an album" button .. the URL link looked like okay to do so ..

https://yourdomain.com/?app=gallery&module=gallery&controller=submit&do=submit&_step=album&chooseAlbum=true&albumLocation=new&category=1

the page is there, can fill everything in .. in the end it needs an image first to start with .. it keeps looping if you start with the album page ..

 

.

 

[motomac]

It's really weird that IPS developers are trying to reinvent the wheel.

The whole logic of the IP.Gallery is strange. It looks like a guy who made it has never seen image galleries before. Never used them. Never seen Facebook photos. I talked about it few months ago, but didn't get any official answer. So it looks like IPS doesn't have any plans to change it. For example, the structure of the gallery is totally wrong, when categories could include both: images and albums. Images should have only one parent - album.

Now I see, that the situation is worse than before. Gallery in 4.0 became more unfriendly and odd. I have 8 years of forums administration experience, but I can't understand how to make an album. I'm pretty sure, common users will not understand it too.

The God made Earth at first and after that made people. IPS offers us to "make people" in the space first.

P.S. Just noticed that even Administrators don't have permissions to make albums by default...

[Joel R]

It's really weird that IPS developers are trying to reinvent the wheel.

The whole logic of the IP.Gallery is strange. It looks like a guy who made it has never seen image galleries before. Never used them. Never seen Facebook photos. I talked about it few months ago, but didn't get any official answer. So it looks like IPS doesn't have any plans to change it. For example, the structure of the gallery is totally wrong, when categories could include both: images and albums. Images should have only one parent - album.

Now I see, that the situation is worse than before. Gallery in 4.0 became more unfriendly and odd. I have 8 years of forums administration experience, but I can't understand how to make an album. I'm pretty sure, common users will not understand it too.

The God made Earth at first and after that made people. IPS offers us to "make people" in the space first.

P.S. Just noticed that even Administrators don't have permissions to make albums by default...

You're mixing and talking about a lot of different things in your post, so I'll try to clarify them:

1) Structure of galleries -- This deserves its own separate discussion, so I'm going to hold off until below.

2) Making an album -- IPS is aware of this confusing workflow, and it's in the Coming Soon on the feature plan.   

 

 

Right now, IPS follows the following structure (one which I wholeheartedly disagree with): 

• Categories are admin-defined: contains images or albums, defines permissions
• Albums are user-defined: contains images

I find this distinction to be vestiges of forum-based galleries, not of standalone or traditional gallery systems.  To me, categories and albums are both "containers."  Quite honestly, I could care less about whether categories can contain images, images + albums, or albums only OR albums contain images only.  But what I do care about is that, irregardless of who created the container, there be a flexible permission set at the container level.  

Currently, permissions are defined at the category level, even though they ought to and should be offered at the album level too.  For example: I have user-created albums where it would be appropriate to allow all registered members to upload.  This is not possible with the current structure.  Or I have mixed albums in a category, some of which can be available to the public and some can't.  This is not possible with the current structure.

Given that BOTH categories and albums can contain images, it would make sense that they BOTH offer permissions of:

1) Who can upload into them

2) Who can view them

Those are the most important aspects of the container, NOT who originally uploaded.  

 

Maybe what I'm really requesting is expanded permissions at the album level, if first allowed at the category level.

[motomac]

OK, but in this case why do we call it categories? It looks like making useless new entities. More simple is to call all of these containers "albums" and implement per album permissions. It would be much easier for understanding.

Just noticed, that it's impossible to prevent uploading images into a certain category. It would be great if they add "Allow photos?" option next to "Allow albums?" No, it's possible via permissions set, but it's still weird. The structure of an entity (container) should depend on it's own properties, not on properties of other entities (user permissions), I think.