By Photowebmax on

Hi,

I am brand new to CMS systems and am taking Drupal for a "test drive." I have Drupal 5 installed and working LOCALLY on my Mac (OS X 10.4).

I am experienced with XHTML and CSS but know nothing about PHP. Drupal seems full of features but it all seems incredibly complicated with its own jargon etc.

How do you attach a photo directly to a post page? If I use the File Attachments function I can only see the photo if I click the List box, but that just creates a link to a blank page with the photo. If I deselect the List box the attached image does not show at all? I have tried to activate several Modules but when I edit the post the same setting offerings are still there. I can never access the functioning module? Going round the bend with this...

Why is something simple like uploading a photo so hard?

Thanks.

Max

⋅ Categories: Drupal 5.x

Comments

mpivon’s picture

mpivon commented

upload the photo to your server
then call it via html:
for example:

<img src="http://www.YourDomain.com/Your_picture_folder/Picture_Name.jpg" alt="What people will read when the mouse hovers over an image">

Photowebmax’s picture

Photowebmax commented

You have to use a hard IMG tag to do this? I have no problems doing so, but I am building a site for a club. Asking members to wrap an image address in an IMG or HTML tag seems counter to what an end user friendly CMS system should be? Isn't there a simple direct way of clicking "add image" and then having it appear in the post? I have done this with ease on a Wordpress page...

yelvington’s picture

yelvington commented

See the contributed modules. Download and install the one you prefer. Pay particular attention to image, imce and image_assist modules.

http://drupal.org/project/Modules/category/67

pharma’s picture

pharma commented

You need couple of modules to do image management in nodes like image.module , image catche, image assistant etc..

Photowebmax’s picture

Photowebmax commented

Thanks for the help!

I now have Image, Image Attach, Image Gallery, ImageMagick, and Image Import clicked and enabled. But when I go to edit the post in question I still get the same original interface and none of the Image Modules?

I am totally blown away by the whole Drupal system. I am testing Drupal, Joomla and CMSMadeSimple. I have some Wordpress experience. I keep coming back to Drupal, it seems to offer so much, but it does seem overly complicated...

Muslim guy’s picture

Muslim guy commented

http://ourfriends4life.com/node/13

*This is an article with node_images enabled - have thumbnails and slideshow effect

*You must install and then configure/settings each module and content type, then you can use the Image management modules powerfully

The difference between Drupal way and others is that each image is treated as a node; each article can have several images (which in turn can exist as individual image node), and you can categorize images in their own gallery as well as with other articles/blogs/story/page

*And you can show your images in your custom user profile

http://muflihun.com/user/1

Muslim guy’s picture

Muslim guy commented

http://drupal.org/project/image
http://drupal.org/project/acidfree
http://drupal.org/project/img_assist

http://drupal.org/project/node_images

Photowebmax’s picture

Photowebmax commented

Thanks Muslim Guy!

I think I have the Image Module turned on. But how do access or use it? When I go to some test posts I don't encounter the Image Module?

I am sure I am suffering "new user" issues but why is the simple task of adding an image so complicated in Drupal?

Max

Muslim guy’s picture

Muslim guy commented

Every time you install a new module, go to the module settings/configuration. Some modules are activated but some are not straightforward

http://domain.com/admin/by-module

To use img_attach or node_image:

Configure
http://domain.com/admin/settings/node_images

To enable page/story/blog/etc to have attached images / to use node_images:

http://domain.com/admin/content/types
http://domain.com/admin/content/types/page (you will see options for PAGE)

*Image Attach settings
*Create attached images:
*Node images

For the most direct way of adding Image:
http://domain.com/node/add/image (adding image with title and description)

joachim’s picture

joachim commented

This handbook page explains how to get started with image_attach: http://drupal.org/node/191718

Photowebmax’s picture

Photowebmax commented

Thanks for the pointers guys...

Like I said I am new to this. I am reading the various sections on images. Whew! I think I have the modules turned on. So far I can go to Admin> Create Content> Image and add an image just fine (also includes a thumbnail.) So, the image upload works...

However, if I go Admin> Create Content> Page or Story and then use the File Attachment box to upload an image I see NO image in the content area I just created. The only way I can get the image into the Drupal page is by clicking the List box in the File Attachment area but this then just shows a hot link (Page or Story page) to the image which then displays the image on a blank page?????

Is it possible to create posts/stories/pages etc where you can type a paragraph, add a photo, type more paragraphs, add a photo etc in Drupal? I do this in Wordpress with ease. If this is not possible then this is a deal breaker for me: I'll have to look to something other than Drupal...

joachim’s picture

joachim commented

It's not File Attachment you want to be using -- at least, not if you want to use Image Attached. That will provide an "Attached Image" section of the node edit form, but as the handbook explains, you have to enable it for each content type.

I'm less sure about photos mingled with paragraphs. There are modules that allow you to use simple tags within body text to insert images anywhere.

. - dot’s picture

. - dot commented

i have got the image modules for drupal 6 but what i was really after was the ability to see images organised according to user.

I wonder it this is possible

I know you can add the image ability to the blog module but i was wondering if an image module can behave like a blog on its own.

If this is possible then it would look tidier etc.

joachim’s picture

joachim commented

You can create a View that shows images per user.

. - dot’s picture

. - dot commented

could you explain how? or perhaps a link that would be helpful? I have downloaded views

joachim’s picture

joachim commented

There's a patch for image 5.x-2.x here: http://drupal.org/node/5963

Otherwise, adding a view yourself is fairly simple: create a view, and set it to filter node-type: image, and an argument of user ID.
You can then get user galleries at (your view's path)/userID

-Anti-’s picture

-Anti- commented

> Is it possible to create posts/stories/pages etc where you can type a paragraph,
> add a photo, type more paragraphs, add a photo etc in Drupal?

I think you are looking firstly for a 'wysiwyg editor' module for the club members. Eg. TinyMCE.
This is the *only* way to help them avoid typing 'html', 'bbcode', or 'markdown' script.
However, be aware that wysiwyg editors themselves may occasionally generate new problems.
One classic example of this is the editor generating wrong urls in links, if you have clean urls
and url rewrites enabled. Another annoyance is the bad, bloated html created by them.

Secondly, to then manage your image upload and to place them inline, I would use the
'IMCE' module. It provides a very good image/file browser and upload system, making it easy
to add an image inline within your post. Not only that, you can set it up so that each user
automatically has their own folder for uploads, plus based on user-role you can give them
access to shared folder trees.
IMCE also 'plugs into' the popular wysiwyg editors, to make adding images inline quite seamless.
This module is the only reason I'm even considering using Drupal for my school website.

Note that using this method of adding images to your site means that your images aren't 'nodes'
in themselves. But I really don't see the point in that for images which are for accompanying
content. I think I'd only usually create images as nodes if they were specifically for use in a gallery.

Understand that you can still use the core 'attachment' upload system to place downloads at
the *bottom of your posts* - that system has nothing to do with placing images and files inline.
However, personally I'd avoid using it on a site with many authors, simply because *all*
attachments go into the same ONE folder, which very quickly becomes a total mess to maintain.
Anyway, be clear that the core 'attachments' module is a download system.

pharma’s picture

pharma commented

thnaks anti for good write . This is the best solution so far for for "inline" images . TinyMCE or FCK editor WITH IMCE module . I like the way IMCE module behaves.

hgmichna’s picture

hgmichna commented

I'm through several of the proposals in this discussion, and the result is rather disillusioning. The truth is that there is no really good solution for the images problem. What I believe most users want is this:

  • A simple way to upload and display pictures
  • Automatic downscaling to a sensible size, perhaps set by the administrator
  • Automatic thumbnail generation
  • Automatic display of clickable thumbnails somewhere in the text, like at the top
  • A gallery or slide show would be nice, but is not essential.
  • Low overhead, like one small additional module, not a complex combination of several modules
  • High reliability, i.e. works with big pictures, etc.
  • Versions for all current Drupal versions
  • A guarantee that there will be a version for future Drupal versions as well or at least a way of transforming or exporting the existing image collections (This is why I'd like a solution that just displays attached images, because the images would still be there and viewable, even if the module has to be dropped.)
  • Simple to use, for example, just displays all (or, better, selected) image attachments.

There are, of course, a lot of additional nice-to-have features, but the big problem is not the lack of these, but the lack of any solution at all. There is not a single solution that comes even close to fulfilling the above conditions.

To get a feeling for the sad situation we are in, look through the third-party modules, here those related to images, and check how many have a version for Drupal 6. My face color turned to greenish-white when I discovered that only a tiny fraction have one. All others, i.e. most, are essentially abandoned. Here is a typical, genuine reply from a module author:

"I have created that module only because one friend asked to create something similar to [...], not because I wanted to add some value for Drupal ;) So sorry, but I don't have any plans in near future to update it."

One of the contributed modules that seemed to come very close to a good solution is Node Images. However, it is already abandoned too. There is no version for Drupal 6. There is no automatic way to export the images already uploaded with it. If you went that way, as I did, you're as dead in the water as I am now, and the same thing can happen with any third-party contributed module.

Node Images doesn't even work correctly any more—at some time it began to issue an unspecified error when the uploaded picture was 2,500 pixels or larger in size, and it shows an incomplete web page section, i.e. it is seriously defective, and I'm now facing a continuous stream of complaints from my web site users, while at the same time knowing that I misled them, due to my lack of foresight. I cannot even say that I was misled myself, because of course the author never guaranteed that he would keep working on the module.

The big trouble is that the same can happen to you with each and every contributed third-party module, unless you have very believable assurances from its maker that errors will be fixed and that it will be adapted to forthcoming new Drupal versions. Who gives such assurances? We are essentially in a childrens' sandbox here with no guarantees and no reliability.

The only really fully acceptable solution would be one that is built into Drupal or perhaps one that has fail-safe characteristics, like one that just displays attached pictures.

I have no clue how these problems can be solved. How can Drupal operators be assured that some third-party add-on module will not turn into a costly dead-end street for them in the future, involving heavy loss of valuable information or very costly manual recovery of images?

Hans-Georg

alan d.’s picture

alan d. commented

1) For functional updated image module

Fork out and commission one of the authors to complete / update the module

2) Check your memory limit

Node Images doesn't even work correctly any more—at some time it began to issue an unspecified error when the uploaded picture was 2,500 pixels or larger in size, and it shows an incomplete web page section, i.e. it is seriously defective, ...

Sounds like a straight forward issue in memory or upload, as defined in your php.ini Just up the limits :)

There a tons of examples covering this on the forums.

Alan Davison
www.caignwebs.com.au
Alan Davison
hgmichna’s picture

hgmichna commented

Alan, thanks for the memory_limit hint. Yes, that was it. Had to increase it to an incredible 256 MB to allow the GD library to rescale larger images. Now I've successfully tested rescaling a 25 Megapixel image. I wish the GD library would work a bit more sensibly with memory, but that's outside our scope.

For Drupal operators without the knowledge or access rights to change Apache or PHP settings this is a pretty bad trap, as the default setting renders the whole thing defective for all practical purposes. But at least for me the problem is now solved.

As to your other hint, since the web sites with those third-party modules are non-commercial, I wouldn't know where to get the money from, but I'll ponder the thought and may ask an author. But this remains a permanent problem with every new Drupal version. I wish the module authors would at least publish their intentions up front.

Hans-Georg

-Anti-’s picture

-Anti- commented

> Had to increase it to an incredible 256 MB to allow the GD library to rescale larger images.

Which is why people don't do this kind of operation server-side. If everyone on a shared
server did that, the internet would slow to a crawl.

It would be nice if users could 'upload' their raw digitial camera photos, and an activex
component (or whatever) would resize them on the user's own computer before actually
uploading them. But unfortunately, I think we're currently stuck with users having to be 'media
aware' when contributing to websites, and optimising their material before uploading it.

> But this remains a permanent problem with every new Drupal version.

Yes, but in the documentation, it is made very clear that the drupal philosophy is to sacrifice
backward-compatibility for cutting-edge technology. I have to say, re-writing my module every
year or two would personally put me off developing, but many people still do develop modules.
Instead of looking at all the dead projects, look at all the ones which have been ported to D6
in the last six months - quite incredible considering no-one got paid a single cent.

You say you can't afford to pay for an images module, but do you realise that locking yourself
into a closed-source CMS would cost you thousands of dollars to get the functionality of a
Drupal site? And you still have no guarantee that they will continue development.

One option is a 'reverse bounty' - users can pool together to offer a monetary reward for
the creation of a certain module.

hgmichna’s picture

hgmichna commented

> If everyone on a shared server did that [image rescaling], the internet would slow to a crawl.

I like the idea to have it done on the user's computer, but actually it is not too bad. These days 256 MB aren't all that much, and the actual rescaling only takes a few seconds at worst.

What irked me much more is that the default installation is dysfunctional. That's the real idiocy we are facing. Running a Drupal site involves a number of very bad traps, which means that many potential Drupal operators try it and give up, because they cannot do the technical tasks required to circumvent these idiotic traps.

I agree that Drupal ist still the best choice for many purposes, such as mine. I'm not about to give up on Drupal. But it can't hurt to talk openly about its problems. Solve any of them and Drupal becomes even better and even more attractive, which is what we all want.

What is increasingly worrying me is the constant stress in the life of every Drupal operator. The life of a Drupal operator runs approximately like this.

  • A new Drupal version is released.
  • The operator of a Drupal web site counts his third-party modules and estimates his chances that all of them will be upgraded.
  • Half a year later half of them are updated, the other half is not. The operator writes emails to the authors, asking for their intentions.
  • Most module authors reply. Some of them write that they are pondering the thought of updating their modules. The operator looks for alternatives for the other modules.
  • There are alternatives for some modules, but not for all of them. The operator is facing loss of information or tedious manual work, like moving hundreds of pictures from one imaging module to another.
  • Three months later the next version of Drupal is announced.
  • Another three months later the operator finally makes the jump and upgrades Drupal and all third-party modules where upgrades are available. He drops the others and installs replacements. He moves data out of the old ones and into their replacements.
  • A week later the next Drupal version is released. At least the operator had one stress-free week without looming problems.
-Anti-’s picture

-Anti- commented

I can't disagree with anything you've said there. Maybe instead of 'the default installation is dysfunctional', I would have said 'very limited functionality'. I'd agree that the image and file handling capability for end-users is extremely weak, and especially inserting and using the media in posts. But I think that reflects the idiocy of continuing to use html protocol for websites, when it was originally designed for disseminating text information between a handful of university networks. Email is also totally inadequate for modern usage. Using these 30 year old protocols is nothing short of brain death.

> What is increasingly worrying me is the constant stress in the life of every Drupal operator.

Perhaps you've hit upon the main issue here. For the average layman building a personal site, a Drupal release is only as good as its modules. Now the reality check - these modules are built by:

· professionals in the course of their work building sites for clients
· people studying scripting languages so they they can become a professional
· hobbyists whose main motivation is learning and/or creating.

Any modules available to us are simply 'offcasts' of these three creation processes.

Most people using drupal for their personal sites can't contribute to those processes, so they are left with being thrown bones. (Although, I have to say, many module developers throw us steaks). Really, there isn't an answer. That's the situation that we must accept or reject.