Josh Lewis wrote:

rgg wrote:This works pretty fast, especially because having only one image eliminates the need to browse.

For a single image that is. Many of us work with lots of pictures. As a result the old editor is still easier to work with.

I work with lots of pictures too, but that's beside the point. The key is that, provided you already know the id of the image you want to use, you enter it the image # as search criterion, and then you always get exactly one single image.

However, I hear you think, "But I don't have the image id!".

Perhaps you don't. I don't know the way you work on a page. However, with the way I work, I often do. When writing a mountain or route page, I typically consider both my own images as well as any relevant other ones on SP. Now, the key is that I don't search for those from within the page I'm editing. Instead, I just browse through [urlhttp://www.summitpost.org/image/]images[/url], using the Advanced Search option and entering the name of the mountain, route, alpine refuge or any other relevant feature. The result would be something like this:

http://www.summitpost.org/object_list.php?object_type=3&object_name_3=Hochwilde&sort_select_3=score

I then look at the individual images. I learned that the best time to do this is after writing most of the text, because that way, when I see a good image, I usually know where in the page it could be relevant. As a bonus, this method automatically provides the image id. I might add that a good image in this context is not necessarily one with a high score, but one that adds something to the text.

Oh, and I like the new editor much better than the old one, even though there are a few minor annoyances with it (if I copy and paste a fragment of HTML code, it annoys me that the editor modifies it slightly, instead of just accepting it exactly as is).

Rob

Matt Lemke wrote:I really like having the caption automatically entered when inserting photos into a page however I agree the "Search SP Images" should be defaulted.

I can understand how sometimes having the caption automatically propagate is desirable, but some people are going to like this feature and some people aren't. Ideally you'd figure out which option pleases the greatest number of people and have that be the default and then have a check box to make the other option available.

rgg wrote:Oh, and I like the new editor much better than the old one, even though there are a few minor annoyances with it (if I copy and paste a fragment of HTML code, it annoys me that the editor modifies it slightly, instead of just accepting it exactly as is).

Rob

I like the new editor too but also noticed the modification when copying things. I entered a trip report using a test custom object, got it formatted just so, and then copied the whole thing to a trip report page and all of the spacing was messed up. Extra lines were inserted in image captions and before and after images.

ZeeJay wrote:

rgg wrote:No browsing needed, just select the one and only image
Click insert

Thank you, that helps a lot, but you missed a step. You need to click select before click insert.

The process could still be improved though. There are a lot of steps that could be eliminated.

Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't I write "just select the one and only image"?


Apart from that, I agree that there are indeed still too many steps. For example, if the result of the search is just one image, it would already help if it was selected automatically. And I would find it more logical if the step "Click Search SP images" would be automatic.

Rob

rgg wrote:Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't I write "just select the one and only image"?

Whoops, I missed it.

I made a video showing what it's like to insert pictures with the old and new editor as seen here:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w32zrC5LyIU[/youtube]

I'm not saying the new editor is bad to insert photos. What I'm saying is a few small additions could be made to make it a lot easier.

A few issues I'll highlight with the new editor and inserting photos:

1. You have to click "Search SP Images" regardless to if you know the ID or not.

2. The image box should be bigger like the old one. Even on my small screen 1024px of width it displayed just fine! As a result you are left with two options, know the ID or do more scrolling. The reason I don't have to remember the ID is because often times when I'm inserting photos I can click "Recent". I typically like to upload my photos as I make pages making them easy to spot.

3. The automatic caption inserted, this requires me to remove the caption. A noob I'm sure will struggle with that part. Even though most of the time in the video I highlighted the caption properly, I had to be careful not to highlight slightly around the text. So at the very least this becomes more tedious. This is not an issue for lazy folks who don't put in captions.

4. It resets every time. The old editor "remembers" your preferences you set (alignment, size, ect). As a result for each picture I have to:
-Click Insert
-Search SP Images
-Click My images
-Click my recent
-Click Select
-Click Insert

When it could all be reduced to three clicks. Insert image, select, insert. That's half the steps. This would make the new editor a lot friendlier to work with.

So out of all the points I made in this post, number 4 is the most important. If it remembered your preferences like the old one, this would help a lot.

Montana Matt wrote:Right. You've already mentioned that you'd prefer to have "Search SP Images" selected by default instead of the option to upload. You and Matt were previously the only ones who had any issue with it being that way. I've still not heard it from what I would consider "a lot" or even "quite a few" users yet...

True. In my last post I consolidated the issues to show how many more clicks are added. Indeed we were the only ones bringing it up, but it appears three more folks bring it to the table:

Bob Sihler wrote:If possible, please fix the new editor so that SP images are selected by default. The current mode discourages me from using the new editor because it adds an extra step.

Gangolf Haub wrote:Same here - I'm using the old editor because of formatting and I never use the inbuilt image upload option.

ZeeJay wrote:I too find inserting existing images tedious with the new editor

Montana Matt wrote:Originally I had it the same size as the old one, but in cases when it flows off the screen it's impossible to select any images below the screen because it will not scroll. This could perhaps be a CSS issue that could be fixed, but I decided to go with the fix of making the box smaller and scroll enabled.

If there is any interest in addressing this issue, I might be able to come up with a clever fix for this.

Montana Matt wrote:What would be preferable? No caption? I think that would be even harder for someone to figure out how to insert one.

Agreed in the sense that captions should have to be blank in all scenarios. This screen shot shows what I'm proposing:



An optional checkbox would make this part very easy to manage for both parties. Even if it was checked by default.

Montana Matt wrote:This may be possible with cookies, though I'm not entirely sure it would be, but the image insert tool loads fresh every time you insert in an image with the new editor. The reason the old editor "remembered" your preferences was because the image insert tool wasn't loaded anew every time an image was inserted. It was simply showing/hiding the same element over and over again.

Is it possible to make it back in the fashion it was made? While it's cool that it's lightbox (as far as I know), the convenience is taken out. Easy of use should always go above styling. And that's coming from someone who loves CSS. Plus doesn't that require more server loads? Or is it purely JavaScript? Even if I was 100% willing to change my ways, it would still be more difficult.

Montana Matt wrote:What I feel like I'm mostly hearing here is some people got used to the way things worked in the old editor and the new editor is requiring some re-learning of habits developed through using the old editor.

If you can think of a method of inserting lots of new pics easy, I'd love to hear it. The extra clicks will tack on more time for working with pages. Not only will time be lost, but it increases the chances of mistakes. Something to consider.

Montana Matt wrote:I think the new editor is much more intuitive as it is for new members to the site.

Agreed. Certainly nice for new folks.

Montana Matt wrote:My guess as to the reason that most older SP members do not do this is because it wasn't previously possible.

Perhaps many folks. But there are quite a few of us who use the bulk uploader. If there was a option to upload multiple images at once, I'd feel a lot better about the upload image being the default. Fineuploader seems like a good choice. I've used it in Joomgallery which made the upload process easier. With the way it's currently set up, uploading one by one is a slow process. And yes I resize my pics before posting them.

ZeeJay wrote:The process could still be improved though. There are a lot of steps that could be eliminated.

Agreed.

Montana Matt wrote:I've still not heard it from what I would consider "a lot" or even "quite a few" users yet...

Unless I'm misinterpreting the posts in this thread, me, Josh, Bob, Gandolf, Matt, and rgg all think the insert image process could be improved.

Montana Matt wrote:What would be preferable? No caption? I think that would be even harder for someone to figure out how to insert one.

As I suggested in a previous post, how about a check box such as "Don't automatically include caption." Some people put a lot of thought and effort into their captioning and end up with several paragraphs of info. It's just not appropriate to have all that detail show up.

Montana Matt wrote:What I feel like I'm mostly hearing here is some people got used to the way things worked in the old editor and the new editor is requiring some re-learning of habits developed through using the old editor.

It sounds to me that we all like the new editor except we think that the insert image process could be improved.

Montana Matt wrote:My thinking to keep the ability to upload images as the primary tab is due to the fact that this is much more intuitive for new members than uploading an image separately and then creating a page.

Please address why in addition to the options "upload", "Search SP Images" and "Link" you can't also have a box to enter an image #.

Montana Matt wrote:Seems to me that most people would upload an image while creating a page. My guess as to the reason that most older SP members do not do this is because it wasn't previously possible.

A complicated page including adding and captioning all the images takes a lot of time. It is simpler to break up the process. If I'm writing a page, it would interrupt my train of thought to go off on all these little add and caption image subroutines while I'm doing the writing. It's much easier if they are already done.

Montana Matt wrote:I might be able to simply port the old editor code for inserting an image back over and create a separate button to use. That might be the easiest way to go...

Yes! That would be great! Perhaps for it's "title" (the one you see on hover) it could say "Insert New Image" and "Insert Uploaded Image". Let me know if you need any styling help or need me to find you a new icon. This would make the new editor a lot easier to work with.

Now if only sections were easier to swap around (for example moving red tape from the top to the bottom). If that was made easier, I would have pretty much no need at all to use the old editor.

All the computer lingo loses me, so pardon me if this has already been addressed in a language I don't understand...

Something I think everyone here could agree on would simply be a modification so that the default insertion option is currently existing SP images, the way it was with the old editor. If that's possible.

Beyond that, it seems we all have our own styles, though I'll repeat, as others have said, a strong dislike for the auto-insertion of captions. There is often much more in my image caption than I think is necessary to show on the main page (and doing so also makes it look messier), so it means deleting a lot of text in many cases, and there are also spacing issues. For example, I usually skip a line and then provide location/date info. With the new editor, that is bunched together with the rest, not even with a space between a period and the first letter of the location/date part. I don't see a need for including that part on the page itself, but even if I did, it looks sloppy and requires an extra editing step to fix or remove.

I agree simply reducing the steps required to put a photo into a page is an awesome idea and making the "Search SP Images" defaulted would make a huge difference.

Regarding your previous post Matt, most users upload their images first before making the page. Even new users now will find it easier to upload photos first especially with the Bulk Uploader which works very well.

However if you are looking for a way to change the current upload process AND reduce uploading steps, maybe when the "insert photo" button on the editor is clicked, have two pop-ups appear, one where you can upload a new photo to SP and another where you can search SP images. I would also recommend having a text box that can also take a photo id. When I search for photos to insert, I have another SP tab open and I look for photos I want in another window and just copy and paste photo id's.

Having two pop-ups open completely removes the "default" problem of having either photo insert method over the other.

Montana Matt wrote:Seems to me that most people would upload an image while creating a page. My guess as to the reason that most older SP members do not do this is because it wasn't previously possible.

A lot of us upload most images before page creation because we don't like seeing incomplete/under construction pages. This has long been a sore spot among a lot of contributing members. So we upload images beforehand and write text beforehand so that we can then work on layout and present a complete page at the moment of submission.

Edit: and the new "Under Construction" option doesn't help this because those pages still appear on the main What's New page. If they were entirely invisible to all but the page owner and then received a creation date that was the same as the one when the writer finally finished the page, that would be a great addition to the site and would provide more of an incentive for me (and perhaps several others) to make the full switch to the new editor and leave behind the old practice of copying and pasting from our custom objects and other workshop pages.

I will echo what Bob said. It's not that my captions of my photos are bad, but are usually too lengthy to go into a page.

Matt Lemke wrote:Having two pop-ups open completely removes the "default" problem of having either photo insert method over the other.

While that seems like a neat idea, two pop ups seems like overkill. It could work in theory, but Matt's idea of having two separate buttons would be better for everyone.

Bob Sihler hit it right on the money. Even if your not using the bulk uploader, I don't like posting incomplete pages. If you could only upload images through the new editor, you'd see my pages be incomplete. This is because I upload my photos over time rather than all at once.

Another reason the photo caption deal can be a hassle is because sometimes I've tried to replace the caption only to replace the image. Then I use the built in undo button. Nothing happens. Right click undo, nothing happens. There goes the photo I looked around for and resized. Now this has rarely happened to me, but it just did a moment ago. Possibly human error. But if another button as Matt suggested was added for inserting images, this problem would come up. I know I'm beating a dead horse, but as I go I'm realizing it's more important than I originally believed it to be.

So far, it appears that quite a few people don't like the automatic insertion of captions when inserting images - well, I disagree, I do like it.

Although I tend to edit the caption afterwards (like Bob's, some of my captions are too big), it would be more work if the caption would start off empty and I would have to add something. However, this is just my own way of doing things, and if others don't like automatic insertion of captions, I wouldn't mind if this would change.

However, much more important is that, without automatic insertion, I believe that we would get to see lots of pages with images that have no captions at all. And that I would consider a bad development!