These are the problems I'm having with images on one site: the images, thumbnails, and previews are in the files/images directory. They are in a gallery, but in the gallery view it shows all the info, but does not show the actual image at any size. The individual image node view is the same. When I inserted the images into other page nodes, some appear and some don't, but I can't see any difference between them.

http://urbanorganic.jeangazis.com/node/2 contains:
 <img src="/files/ur1/images/red-williams-pears.jpg" class="framert" alt="red pears">

http://urbanorganic.jeangazis.com/node/1 contains:
<img src="/files/ur1/images/1-basil.jpg" class="framert" alt="fresh basil">

The first image is visible, the second shows the alt text or a missing icon depending on the browser. I can't figure out what's different. I did not change any settings in the image module, and resetting to defaults just in case didn't do anything.

In addition, when I tried to use the "image import" feature, it made duplicate copies of the thumbnail and preview and put them back in the original directory where it was importing _from_.

Any ideas?

Jean

On 8/28/07, Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@webthatworks.it> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:23:20 -0400
"Jean Gazis" <jgazis@gmail.com> wrote:

> I also have a site where I really need it to be easy for users to
> upload photos, and it doesn't look like imagefield and imagecache
> are the answer to that, either. I might try one of the gallery
> mods. I've only used the gallery that comes with image.

I'm using it with 5.2... I used it with 4.5 or 4.7 and uploaded some
hundreds of images with no problem.
Yep... the upload part is hard to fine tune (permissions? quota?
taxonomy?)
So your main problem was uploads and erratic behaviour, is it?

> So it seems like the module has a reputation for being buggy, and
> is going wrong for me in more than one way, so I'm interested in
> alternatives. I'd prefer that they don't require custome theming,
> though, because I haven't gotten into that yet.

Well my problem was css were scattered in gallery2, block, gallery
etc... and having something that look good in drupal *and* in gallery
as a stand alone app was not that fun + some repetition not perfect
integration in "messages".
I'm not saying that it was terribly hard or impossible... just it was
boring and I think hard to maintain.

My concern is that while I find positive Image module looks like a
page node... maybe it looks like a page node too much, users should
have "less" freedom.

Just first impression... actually I was interested in your opinion to
standarize/invest in one module to build up galleries.

--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it

--
[ Drupal support list | http://lists.drupal.org/ ]



--
Jean Gazis
www.jeangazis.com
www.boxofrain.us

"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." - André Gide