Examples of the same, new, rather eclectic gallery in Google Photos and Flickr
illustrating below discussion.
Google <https://goo.gl/photos/kCJPMV2TuZKxgt6r6>
Flickr <https://flic.kr/s/aHskVfeFvD>
You are welcome to just look at the pictures. :-P Try 'em on your phones and tablets, too; whaddya think about the
display? About the images?
On 2/26/2017 1:07 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
<<Google Photos uses the standard mobile interface, images sized to fit, swipe
to
<<move, expandable images.
I suppose you looked at all the usual suspects. <snip stuff mostly about
SnugMug>
On 2/26/2017 3:56 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
My new site is mobile friendly and formats itself to whatever shape or
size of the viewing device. However, the gallery system is very much
pre-adaptive and there is absolutely no good alternative right now,
outside of using an external system like Flikr or Google+, but history
WILL repeat itself and we'll be orphaned or lose control or whatever.
On 3/1/2017 4:07 AM, ChrisB wrote:
That looks good, Moose. Do you now use Google Photos?
Chris, I not yet entirely sure know what I'm 'using':
I've been looking at alternatives to the conventional ways of display used by Zone-10, Singapore, SmugMug, and so on.
Although I personally am often happy to wander through posted galleries, I get the distinct impression that many folks
browse the small thumbnails and look at a few images. Well, OK, I've done that myself. :-) To my mind, that means great
images passed over, as thumb doesn't often do justice to image.
The use of screen space is really poor, small sample images, surrounded by lots of dead space and unnecessary stuff. Get
on phone or tablet, and it's even worse. The browser uses up a lot of screen space and presentation and navigation are
awkward, slightly to a lot. Viewing any individual image requires moving it on the screen - for each image.
My biggest fan, Carol, doesn't see even all the images I post here. She is almost never on a 'real' computer, and they
are a pain to view on a browser. With Google Photos, specifically shared with her, she gets notified whenever I have
added images - and I get a notice when she's looked at them. A far, far superior model for family and friends who live
on their mobile devices.
Some time ago, I did what you are doing, tried to work using WordPress. I was able to force the 'Modularity Lite' theme
into showing large, in-line images, with all the stuff about other posts, etc. down at the bottom.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/WP_Gallery/>
I found the process of adding images and text between then really tedious, and abandoned the effort after six posts.
Putting full size images in-line gets away from your display size/navigation problem. But moving the stuff from side to
bottom wouldn't be very useful for your continuous model. In any case, its not all that good on mobile devices.
Google and Flickr both have mobile apps that eliminate the browser space overhead and implement sizing to screen, pinch
resizing and the familiar swipe to the next image model that all mobile users are used to. Google's implementations,
both computer and mobile, are slightly better, to my mind. (SmugMug says it allows one to create custom mobile apps for
controllable content. That's awkward for something like this list, and I have no idea how well it may work.)
In browsers, both do a nice job of using most of the screen real estate efficiently and providing much larger sample
images by creating collages. They are quite similar at first glance. Flickr is slightly dumber. In the above example, on
my 24" screen, Flickr actually enlarges, poorly, 'Piscine Orbits' and 'Springing Forth' above their original size in the
collage, resulting in bad looking images. Click on one, and it's fine. On iOS, Google also does the collage thing,
rather well. Flickr gives that up, and just shows thumbnails, at least all close to each other, to optimize space use.
Flickr has better EXIF summary data and a way to see it all (or at least most), while Google is very bare bones. On iOS,
both apps show the lens used, which is nowhere to be found in their browser versions, or in any regular galleries I
know. (Yes, it's a pain to get, as it is in different places, under different tags, for different makers, but certainly
doable.)
The maps in Flickr are useless, as they don't differentiate between the image at hand and those made by others in the
same area. As expected, the maps in Google Photos are excellent.
Taking into account all the above, and whatever factors I've missed, I thought google Photos did the best overall job
for both browsers and mobile app (at least for iOS. I took the early death of an Android tablet as an omen, and have
stayed away.)
Displaying Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|