And now sometimes when I click on a picture to enlarge it after thumbnail view, I get a request asking how I want to open each jpeg (Picasa etc.). Some pictures enlarge fine but others bring up that message. I didn't explain that very well....

I'm using the latest Firefox.

Something has very definitely changed since early yesterday!

I use Firefox also, but this auto-opening menu for jpegs doesn't happen outside SP. I don't really understand it; all modern browsers know how to display jpegs directly.

butitsadryheat wrote:I am seeing the dreaded red X, and some of the photos are not showing up on my profile at all. Simply white squares. All of the title and description info appears, but not the photos themselves.

I've seen this with every browser I've used, when the connection to the server is poor and there are fits and starts in loading.

Montana Matt wrote:

butitsadryheat wrote:I am seeing the dreaded red X, and some of the photos are not showing up on my profile at all. Simply white squares. All of the title and description info appears, but not the photos themselves.

Strange

Hmmm, which photos exactly? Looking at your profile, all of the images on your profile page show (the squares) and I went through some of the image pages and they all showed for me.

This happened to me at work yesterday morning with my profile picture using IE. I'm at home today using Firefox.

I've only run a handful of tests (with Firefox), but it seems to be related to the extension of the image file: .jpg is good and .JPG is bad.

Can we be told whats going on and why? It sounds interesting, is there a little blurb in another thread about the nature of the change?

Anyway, best of luck getting it all working!

brenta wrote:I've only run a handful of tests (with Firefox), but it seems to be related to the extension of the image file: .jpg is good and .JPG is bad.

I've had this problem when writing one of my pages, heard this explanation too, but some of my pics were visible only with .jpg and some others only with .JPG, couldn't work it out.

silversummit wrote:And now sometimes when I click on a picture to enlarge it after thumbnail view, I get a request asking how I want to open each jpeg (Picasa etc.). Some pictures enlarge fine but others bring up that message. I didn't explain that very well....

Yeah that's quite common and I find it quite annoying... anyway, don't wanna sound uptight, so take your time Matt and thanks for your good work

a new little problem ...
if I click on the photo, in a photo page, to see the original :
in some cases the original photo come out
in some others I get the photo file downloaded to my computer
...

brenta wrote:I've only run a handful of tests (with Firefox), but it seems to be related to the extension of the image file: .jpg is good and .JPG is bad.

Thanks, I just repeated that with my SP-hosted images, and that's exactly what I got, in about 10 trials. Puzzling; I would think the client-side app decides if an image will be displayed in browser window. My browser displays local images correctly whether they are JPG or jpg.

I can't see why it would make a difference (even knowing that the server OS is case-sensitive), but maybe the server folks need to associate both jpg and JPG with images.

butitsadryheat wrote:I am seeing the dreaded red X, and some of the photos are not showing up on my profile at all. Simply white squares. All of the title and description info appears, but not the photos themselves.

Strange

This is happening to me as well. Strangely, if I use Craig's computer it's fine -- only on mine cannot seem to load the images. We are both running XP with IE.

Ugh Matt, what a PITA! I never realized this much went on behind the scenes.

I see the http://c0278592.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com stuff on XP running either MSIE8 or Firefox 3.5.5. Same thing on my Vista machine with Firefox 3.0.15 and MSIE8.

Strangely, with some pics the image appears in the browser window with the rackspacecloud.com URL, and with others I'm prompted to open the picture with the registered picture editor on my machine. The former behavior -

http://www.summitpost.org/view_object.p ... t_id=92822

The latter -

http://www.summitpost.org/view_object.p ... _id=403079

But only in Firefox.. MSIE8 seems to treat them both the same way. Are different batches of pics being delivered with a different content type ?

MoapaPk wrote:Ugh Matt, what a PITA! I never realized this much went on behind the scenes.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain ...

THE GREAT OZ has spoken!