Integrate with SWFupload/Image Fupload

That would be amazing.
Actually it's the only reason why I can't use Node Gallery, since our users usually posts 20+ images and selecting one by one (even in bulk upload) is a pain.
FUpload integration would be fantastic.

I think this module is the best image module for drupal. However, if it had swfupload support it would be totally killer. I know I have clients that like mass uploading of images.

SWFupload functionality would be great ;-)

yes with this extra this gallery would be the best I found, yet.

I agree. This would be very useful..

Yes, it would be very very good... please

Does anybody of you read what is written on the project page?

By the way the development happens in the 2.x branch and I don't think the 1.x will have this stuff (not sure). Anyways, you would have to go with the 2.x branch because this is the branch where the magic happens.

Yes I read that, but I think everybody of this thread want to show that this feature should get a higher priority so that it can be used fast.

agree :)

bulk upload is a must for a great gallery.
swf is good, but can it handle non-image uploads? i think it's important that nodegallery can handle all files as items, not just images, eg pdf, doc, xls, etc. it follows that i think it's important that the multi-upload function can upload images and non-image files all in one go.

yes, from a more abstract level and objective aspect , node gallery is just a collection which gallery is the container and image is the item within. But since gallery (or album) maybe is the most used collection type, so i think it's more important to implement a "gallery" module than a "colletion" module.

Agree, there is much higher need for uploading images than files to collection.

I choose Node gallery for second site I'm building (it's simply the best sollution out there and I've tried a lot of them) with hopes flash upload will come soon :).

Susbscribing

my2cents. agree with everyone! bulk upload would be a really nice feature, Icing on the cake.
As far as the module it's self, I have tried most of the galleries and this one is great.
Some are decent, but not as close to core way of nodes, comments, views and easy like this one.

Agreed. It's obviously on the planned feature list but bulk or batch upload would complete the package.

+1, subscribing...

subscribe

Another 2p from me. I've been beating around the bush for months on which gallery to use, but mass uploads is a must and fupload seems to be the best of these.

I think that SWFupload is very important for this Gallary. If I am right, Fupload module work only with one CCK field, so it's not good. That's why SWFupload integration better.
And to add different material type (not only image) will be also interesting

Will SWFupload replace all other options for bulk upload? SWFupload uses Flash and Flash is banned from many sites. A simple Ajax alternative is preferable. http://drupal.org/project/itweak_upload looks like a good starting point. If the best of IMCE was mixed with itweak upload and jQuery, you could have a fabulous upload with no dependencies on external software.

@peterx - I'm curious as to why you state that "Flash is banned from many sites". Thanks.

Not sure, but he may be talking about client computers that ban flash or won't use it? Or maybe don't have flash.

Talking about sites that ban flash because clients don't use it or use computers that don't have flash or have an old flash that does not work with current flash and we know the visitors will not download an updated flash when it is easier to leave our sites and go buy what they want at another site.

From a shoppers perspective, a search for any given product will turn up 30 or more local sites selling at similar prices with similar delivery charges. I am not going to visit all 30 sites. If one site has a message about installing software or updating to a new release, click and that site is gone. Why would an experienced site owner risk being the only site dependent on flash? Using flash in those circumstances is similar to the old thing about This site is best viewed at 1289 by 654.75 pixels.

As an example, I went shopping for a car last week. One site had all text in flash. The button that says Bypass flash is in flash. If you do bypass the home page flash, you end up at pages where the menus are flash, the product list is in flash, and the product pages are done in flash. None of the navigation is remotely like anything used in any other site. This is for a brand with ten competitors in the same size/price bracket. yes, some of the competitors do use flash but they use it only as animations linked from still images and all the information is in text.

Flash should only be an option an individual visitor can choose to use. I work on a lot of sites where there are many contributors and they should be able to perform everything without touching flash.

Hmmm. Will your visitors be using swfupload? If not then you can install the latest version of flash on your system and not use flash for public-facing pages. No?

TrinitySEM, think of sites similar to Drupal documentation pages and forums. Have all the registered users submitting content, including screen prints and other types of files, from every type of computer in existence. All those end users out there with problems installing Linux, Windows, a USB device, or a sound system. Right in the middle of them reporting a problem with their computer, you tell them they have to install software on their computer to continue reporting the problem with their computer.

Hello Adobe support, I cannot get Flash working.
Upload a screen print.
How?
Well, first you have to get Flash working.

If intended for the application you mention, then yes I agree that may be a problem. However, If you can believe Adobe's statistics, 99% of PCs have the Flash Player already installed http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/.

Adobe paid Millward Brown to conduct the survey. Millward Brown passed the job on to Lightspeed. Lightspeed used their existing panels of people in America and Europe. Lightspeed outsourced some Asian countries to GMI. To join the Lightspeed panel and collect their rewards, you require flash installed and working. Lightspeed surveyed Flash users, not the general Internet population.

Accessibility: WebAIM on Flash:
It is very clear from these results and the many strong comments about Flash inaccessibility that screen reader users have significant issues accessing Flash content.
Why should we exclude visually impaired people from submitting content?

+1 on the SWFUpload. I know it's not a new idea, just showing my support of it.

+1 for a bulk upload solution

This is in the plans for the future and there are plenty of people that would like it.
There are reasons that some people might want something other than a flash based solution, I understand that too.
Maybe there is a code person that could submit a patch? I wish I knew how, but I'm a dummy when it comes to php coding. I am a good tester...

The developers do have this in their sights down the road as is stated in the handbook:
http://drupal.org/node/544050
And on the module page:
http://drupal.org/project/node_gallery

Good things come those who are willing to wait.

We would definitely accept any bulk-solution patch. The currently funder that will take this module into RC mode does not have any need for the solution, so it is not on my radar right now.

wilson & kmonty, thanks for maintaining this great module.

I second this request of node_gallery to work together with image fupload. At the same time, solutions for problems like what peterx had brought out, I hope that node_gallery don't get rid of the current upload form. But have it an option for the user instead.

Create content > Add Gallery > FUpload, another link on the page for user who can't use flash to use the traditional upload.

please

plz_

I join the wish to add the module to bulk upload images

on site http://drupal.org/node/544050 in plans
Future Upcoming Features:
* Bulk uploading using Swfupload.

Tell me please, when is planned for this function?

Hi kmonty,

I will take over to find a solution of a bulk upload based on jquery. I will do it as a contrib module, so it stays optional. I need that feature too.

Hm after thinking a bit and looking around I found this module http://drupal.org/project/imagex. I think I will write a module, that depends on imagex and integrates it with node_gallery.

Cheers

Dirk

DesignWork - I emailed you via your D.O contact form, I'm copying you on your website's info address.

subscribe

sounds good to me. for node_gallery.module, by default please make the multiple upload as an option to user, so that they can still use the old traditional form.

Just a note that a prerequisite to resolving this issue is #422878: Node Gallery Support for CCK ImageField. If someone implements a bulk upload tool that uses the current File API image store, it will need to be re-written once the move to imagefield is complete. To avoid wasting precious dev resources, I would recommend waiting for just a few more weeks on this and see where things are at.

I would also think that this would be implemented ideally as a separate module dependent upon Node Gallery core. There are tons of different bulk upload modules in Drupal, some use JQuery, some use Java, most use Flash. By implementing these as add on modules, we will allow the user to choose for themselves which interface they prefer. This also allows us to supply support for single uploads in Node Gallery core to users who might not have Flash/Java as an option, and allow admins to constrain uploads to 'one-at-a-time' to keep site load and bandwidth in check.

Looks like this module is has gained quite a lot of momentum recently! For me it has been the only gallery module worth considering. With imagefield and batch uploading this would be a killer module!

Hi justintime,

I`m close to an alpha module with my image drag and drop upload, based on the imagex (drupal.org/project/imagex). I just wondered how long it will take to change node_gallery_upload to imagefield upload?

I save the nodes (images) at the moment with a node_save($node) do you think this will be possible with imagefield?

Cheers

Dirk

Hard to say for sure. I'll create a DRUPAL--6-3 branch for it. I will probably strip away everything except for the very core functionality, then one by one add the features back in.

If things go as planned, I'll have a couple days off the last week of January, and hopefully I can devote the majority of those to doing this.

Hi all,

I wrote a little module (very alpha) for mass image uploads that works with node_gallery. The Module is based on the imagex module ( http://drupal.org/project/imagex ) of Simon Rycroft. It is a kind of fork and I will ask him if I´m allowed to use parts of his code and his postlet.

At the moment this is very alpha and you may only use it for testing. I will ask Simon Rycroft if we can join our code to make one module out of it.

So please test it and send me the results.

Cheers

Dirk

Hi all,

here is a more stable version of the module. It should work without big problems.
I just need to adjust the image limits. This I will check out later.
You my set under user permissions who will be able to use the multiple upload.

Please delete the old module version completely before installing the new version.

Cheers

Dirk

Just tested image_fupload + NG3 over my lunch break. image_fupload integration works seamlessly with no hackery to either module. Not only can you upload any number of images, you choose the gallery to import them to. In fact, due to the way both modules use the node/add form, I didn't write a line of code -- just a small bit of setup after installing image_fupload.

That made my week, I hope it brightens everyone else's too!

Hi justin,

that sounds good to me......

Dirk

So what is the best solution now for this issue for people who can't write php?

Could you write a small tutorial for this? What you exactly did? I think there will be alot people who would like to get this working :)

@#53 and #54
here is the current module for node_gallery version 2, located in this thread.
http://drupal.org/files/issues/node_gallery_imagex_1.zip
You can try a demo of this at http://www.davebeall.com/node-gallery-imagex

The SWFupload module will be for node_gallery version 3, which is not released yet

Multiply upload doesn't work for me in this demo. Tested in IE6. Java has installed.

here is screenshot in attach

IE6? Really?

I heavily doubt that anybody here is keen on fixing just another IE6 problem... ;)

I just did a test gallery with IE6 and it worked. The gallery is the last one in the list.
IE6 is just about dead these days since we are on IE8 now. There are still lots of people that use it, but they should upgrade.
It's like Drupal is on 6.16, and 6.10 is dead, I hope everyone has upgraded.

So, can you tell me, please, a link to java installer which you used for testing?

here is where I get it
http://www.java.com/en/download/manual.jsp

32 or 64 bit version?

I have an old windows xp 2001 box that I use everyday, it's 32 bit. If your computer is old, I would guess it's 32.

i've tested in win xp too (old corporatre edition with sp3) with IE6. Then I installed Java. And when i click Upload button IE return error... so, it doesn't work for me.

help,

if used multiupload "node_gallery_imagex", token [parent-node-gallery-path-raw] ([parent-node-gallery-path]), don't work. :((
please fix this issue/

@rus032,, it works for me.
I have used the tokens on my test site in pathauto and custom breadcrumbs.
www.davebeall.com

imagex works on the basis of a java applet, doesn't it -> so node_gallery_imagex also does?

node_gallery_imagex is based from the imagex module, so the answer is ,, it's the same.

IMHO there is a kind of a wall which holds a lot of users back from using java based tools -> when they are requested to accept/trust the Sun inc.
There is often a reaction like: 'oh, do I need to be worried about something inside of this tool? Who is Sun incorporated and why should I trust them!?'.
Besides this facts Java also takes more time to initialize than flash. But I think you guys have considered all this points and have good reasons for your decision to use java.
So, thank you for all your work on this!

Designwork did the port work to have a bulk up load.. There was no 'decision' involved, I believe it was a somewhat easy solution to provide a bulk upload feature in an add-on module for node_gallery.
If you would like a flash based bulk upload add-on, you are more than welcome to develop it and submit it to the developers or make a add-on module for node_gallery that uses flash.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you and I'm also very thankful about every volunteer who helps out in the community with commits, tests etc. A part of all them is also to ask for the reasons of a decision. I'm sorry if my questions was unproductive or expressed impolitely. It wasn't my goal, of course.
After I've posted my comment I found the Views Gallery module which fits the needs (incl. image fupload) of the current project perfectly in all cases. So I have to switch to Views Gallery for now. I wish you guys all the best! :)

Are there instructions on how to set up Fupload wtih Node Gallery 3 somewhere?

There isn't really a lot to set up, enable image_Fupload in the cck subsection of the module list page.

Then goto admin > site configuration > node gallery > common settings,,
check mark
[x] Use image_fupload module to upload images?
When checked, image_fupload will be used to upload new images to galleries.

See #947130: Evaluate plupload for bulk image uploading. I'll likely leave what integration with image_fupload there is in 3.x now, but focus on plupload from here on out.

subscribe

@vodoleq, this issue is closed, so subscribing won't do you any good - there likely won't be any new posts on this issue :)

We went with plupload, which IMHO smokes anything that image_fupload could ever dream of doing. See #947130: Evaluate plupload for bulk image uploading.