As I have 230 images for this album, I used FTP to upload them to the same place the 0.jpg image was. Went to Admin to sort the album:

Sort Album: 1982 England, Scotland & Wales

Fatal error: Call to undefined function gettext_() in /rbctravels.mydomain.com/zp-core/albumsort.php on line 55

Yes, sorry that is a typo, we missed as we are currently implementing gettext for localization. Will be corrected in the nightly (or you do it yourself for now (just remove the "_" in that line).

Thank you, acrylian. Thought the album froze with all the snow blowing around Something I've noticed: when I view my directory itself, the filenames are sorted numerically 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. However, when I set sort by filename, the files in view sorted by text 0,1,10,2....

I know from handling databases when the field isn't set to "number" that happens. Not sure if there's a way of correcting this. Or, it means manually sorting my images (230 of them in the first album

A search did not find a solution. Maybe someone can contribute an answer. Of course, the field for the filename is alpha, so all else being equal it will sort the way you observe.

Maybe you uploaded them in numeric order, then you can try sorting in ID.

Or you could rename your files: So if you have 100+ images in that album, rename 1, 2 etc to 001,002 etc.

It's not only the ordinals of 1-9, it's 20s, 30s, 40s etc. That would be A LOT of manual labour. And, ALL my albums are named in that convention because the apps I've used do that. My other web albums were manual so it was never a problem.

I'm doing a manual sort however, that too is hard because with SORT ALBUM, you don't see the file name so I'm matching up to an offline album. That may not be an option in every case.

If you put your cursor on the image thumb, your browser shold show the URL which will include the file name.

But you really should try the ID sort order first. It is likely to get you very close to the right order since the files were in order on your desktop. Even a date order should be close if the images were numbered when they were taken.

Okay, will play with that. Just getting over a crisis in FTP whereby the domain name dropped a character somewhere in creation and I wasn't connecting properly!
Thanks for your help.

sbillard:
Just set "crop" to yes. Set thumbs to 130 x 130 and see what I want. Nice neat rows of pictures with heads chopped off Maybe a future release can scale instead of chop <LOL!>

Oh, the tooltip hover for the filename doesn't work in Safari, i'm not seeing the name.

Ironically, the site is looking like my web-based one that I manually did. With all the missing links, incorrect links, etc. (mostly after adding a missed photo or rearranging MANUALLY).

PS: I sent Dreamhost support guy the posting regarding them picking up Zenphoto for easy install as I just happen to have a support ticket open and mentioned the install. I'm sure he's spreading it around! (I didn't use it as I wanted the files installed.)

You can turn off cropping if you wish. Then the thumbnail is just scaled. But, of course, if you do not crop the image it will remain in the same aspect ratio as the original, so for most cameras, that won't be square.

There is a feature request in for custom cropping of images. With that you could select the portion of the image that would remain after cropping.

Still curious why "cropping" over rescaling size? I've always seen that done for most photo album apps that I've tried.

You can do either, it is up to you. It is just that rescaling of an image will NOT change its aspect ratios. So, if you want to have a square thumbnail from a oblong retangle image then you HAVE to crop something out.

Well, here's an example: using Zenphoto's way, I'm having great difficulty sorting the 'thumbs' because I can't tell what some are to match with the Photoshop resized thumbs (other album of mine) that are proper scale to the full size images they represent. Cropping removes parts. Parts that help identify what the picture is.

Taking my oblong portrait images and making square were _not_ cropped. I just set the width/length and remove keep proportion. Photoshop & Fireworks both did the rest (web album feature.) A bit squished but at least they are all identifiable. My use of the term is resize the way Photoshop, Fireworks, probably the Facebook site, and others I've used does. Doesn't have to be squares. If kept landscape/portrait then a proportional rescaling of the full size.

It's now about 3 hours and I'm still sorting the images. And this is just one album. I think the Sort by ID you mention is only for digital photos. These are the old fashion 35mm scanned to disk.

Now, on the plus side of this app: we just had a fire alarm go off. I did what every good citizen is suppose to do: exit. Take nothing (okay my coat & bag). At least I knew my stuff was online and if my computer melted away, all was still there Gee, I need a life! (LONG winter!)

I guess that is a matter of taste, I personally find galleries with cropped square thumbs better looking and easier to look at.

Taking my oblong portrait images and making square were _not_ cropped. I just set the width/length and remove keep proportion.

Well, I really don't see that as an advantage to cropping....:-) You could try this with html, setting the <img> with a width or height, that will do the same.

No, not really. If <img> is set to dimensions other than its default, the image is expanded or squished, nothing is missing. A full portrait would still show head to toe. IF the image is cropped to the size, then body parts disappear Just a bit funny to see the thumbs with heads chopped off then full image with head back on <LAUGH>

Back to sorting (I'm not done yet!)

Sort by ID sorts the images by the database ID. All images have one. Besides, all the images that are in your gallery are digital by the time they get there. Perhaps you are thinking of some EXIF/IPTC field?

So, sorting by ID will put the images in the order that they were discovered by zenphoto--usually the order they were uploaded.

macalter ... the confusion about cropping is killing me!

You do not have to have square cropped thumbnails! Go into your admin panel, click Options tab, click Image Display tab, and uncheck the box next to "Crop thumbnails:" (8th from the top). The thumbnails will not be cropped!

We would never be daft enough to force you into cropping! It is the default, but you can change it easily. Sorry for the confusion.

Also, for sorting, "ID" doesn't care if it's digital or from film - it's all the same to Zenphoto. You should try ID, and Date and see if they get you closer. You can change sort methods all you want, it will save your hard work manual sorting.

And, honestly, you should change the filenames to match the order you want if it's this much trouble for you.

trisweb:
The filenames are in the order I require with 0.jpg being the first image on day 1 and 230.jpg being the last image 3 weeks later. It's how numeric named files are handled in a particular application that's problematic but not exclusive to ZP.

My only example is using databases. Defined fields are either NUMERIC so that files sort sequentially as 1-10,11-99,100-199 or TEXT where files sort as 1,10,100,101-109,11,110-119,12,120-129 and so on. When viewed in the directory (Finder), they are in sequential order.

Can't remember if the files were named when I scanned them or if Photoshop/Fireworks did them when I used their web album feature. Whatever, every album I have is consistently given numeric file names. In fact, it must have been the apps as long ago, they were named using a date and sequential number combo.

It would take longer to renumber over 200 images in the one album let alone all the others to come It's only in apps that don't handle the sequential order that's problematic. (And I have no idea of what controls such matters.)

It would be difficult to handle that, as the field does not store *only* numeric entries, but they are *strings*, like "1.jpg" which is not just a number.

So, we can't even allow numeric sorting because the filename can be anything. It may not even contain numbers.

Your Mac Finder is smart enough to handle this, and we could be too, but it would be a lot of work for us ;-)

There are mass-renaming tools you can use also that will take your numeric images and name them correctly in 2 seconds, but I don't know of any for Mac.

Re: square cropping, did my other post fix that problem for you?