I was having a discussion with VM where I wanted to alter the positions of text and image - http://drupal.org/node/498816#comment-1748062 . Though this was not solved VM pointed some relevant issues regarding the usage of Acidfree.

Those of you who have not tested Acidfree it is a simple lightweight solution to provide gallery and per user gallery out of the box for Drupal 6x, without need of heavier stuffs like Image Cache or Views which may not or may have problems for the ordinary shared host users.

Acidfree installation is simple and just work out-of-the-box - why it more suits my bill is that it offers by default the most logical pager below each node as well as pager for the list pages. It also lets one add text, the type of text that you will add in a story/blog/article with options like Full HTML etc. ( Node Gallery does not offer this and misses this type of pager, an issue which I have already posted in their issue list) .

The current Drupal trend also seems to flow in two streams - one is lean core, as pointed out by VM in that thread, the other is EASY ONE SHOT installations (profiles) for those who have well demarcated needs, for example, I need a gallery with minimum of extra modules ( this module needs this module which needs another ).

The main negative against Acidfree seems to be the Developer is no more working on it and the project is still not marked green or supported for Drupal 6.

From the limited knowledge I have and as far as I tested I did not find any serious problem, though like anyone I will like to know how it will scale with 500 x 500 image nodes ( 500 users each having 500 images ) or for that matter, 1000 x 1000 image nodes.

As far as the issue list is concerned there are only three or two bug reports ( one by me, though after discussion with VM it appears to be a template problem). http://drupal.org/project/issues/acidfree?text=&status=Open&priorities=A... I have seen many green-marked projects with far more issues in their issue-lists.
My question is if there is any learned member here, who uses or can test Acidfree, can he/they say :

# is it good to use despite being marked red
# does the reported bugs are of any serious significance
# does any one have any close contact with the developer to request him to release a beta
# have any one got it running on a production site with good number of image nodes ?

Comments

kaakuu’s picture

It will be very helpful to get advice from real users. The usage statistics as of June 14 shows
there are plenty of users. People usually do not visit forum unless they have a problem ( or want to help out). So I am not sure if the Acidfree users are here. But if there is any possible way, communication from them can be of serious help.

Project usage of Gallery modules as on June 14 this month

Acidfree Albums 758

Node Gallery 537

Simple Gallery 356

CCK Gallery 132

WorldFallz’s picture

Regardless of whether or not people find the current incarnation of acidfree stable and usable, the fact that the trend in drupal is towards cck/views galleries in combination with the fact the module appears to be abandoned pretty much makes it a "no recommend" to me. With cck and image handling in core for d7 and views on it's way there's going to be even less need for rigid single module solutions for image galleries.

While I'm sure you can certainly use acidfree, you're backing yourself into a future corner with no migration path to something else.

kaakuu’s picture

If you are sure Acidfree can be used it is a great assurance. While I have tested enough locally, the only thing I want is that something should not break in the middle in the actual site. This part of the site will be non-interactive, so I think Drupal 6x can be continued indefinitely. There will be no user input or webforms so I think security will never be a problem (only read only access)

Drupal will still continue to consist of many, many "single" modules - it seems to me. For example, advanced forum module and at least two hundred ( the actual figure may be more ) modules seems to be getting ready for Drupal 7 - http://drupal.org/project/modules?filters=drupal_core:103&solrsort=sort_...

Views is yet another module and I do not know if it is in core. Views has resource issues at least in shared hosting servers and appears to be a "heavy" module. Many people will still need out-of-the-box Gallery solutions.

The only reason I need Acidfree is it still provides me the features I need, like proper text content workflow and the unique and logical pagination, which could NOT be produced by cck/views or any of the available modules including the custom pager modules. If you follow my tracker, I have already made several posts including an issue to node gallery on these matters. If they provide the solution there will be no problem in adpoting the newer modules.

Drupal 7 seems to be a far-off proposition at this time, it will take another two years to get all the contrib modules in it. Also in opensource there is no guarantee Views will be there for Drupal 9, 10 etc just like Acidfree. The Acidfree maintainer seems to be to busy with his IBM job and I think this fate may happen to any module. If it catches someone's fancy, someone may make even a D 7 version of it. If I ever learn and have time ( but that wont be before another three years at least ) I may try to convert it for D 7 :) . I know it is day dreaming but it is good to have smaller footprint stuff and custom code for certain areas of a site.

With all that said, if cck/views can do what Acidfree does I will be very very happy if some one shows me exactly. I have seen the lullabot video which uses cck/views to make gallery but it is not per user and far from what Acidfree does. It does not mean cck/views cannot do, but I am not a coder right now and will be glad to have a look at such a solution at this moment.

Michelle’s picture

She wasn't saying that non core modules won't exist in D7; she's saying that single "do everything" modules are going away. Rather than have a single image gallery module, folks are making them out of the foundation modules like cck, views, imagecache, etc. Advanced Forum, which you used as an example, doesn't try to do the whole forum on its own but rather makes use of many other contributed modules that come together to form a forum.

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

I see. But Acidfree is not at all a "do everything" module, nowhere near "do everything". It takes up the content type Image module only, creates per user galleries using Taxonomy and got a pager that is irreproducible by any other drupal means so far. To me, it seems Acidfree has a very small footprint.
Is it not the purpose of modules to make your site light and fast as far as possible? I think that is why they exist - for example someone may not need the detailed nature and heaviness of Views just to have a lightweight gallery.

And I guess at least a dozen modules in the list of D 7 modules can be cooked up or glued by what you say are core stuffs, but still they are there. Lucky that they have active maintainers.

Both Imagecache and Views needs lot of memory ( a term in comparison, not absolute) - so it may be debatable whether to use multiple such modules, where again you have to check out their interoperability with certain contrib modules you may need and you have to do MULTIPLE updates in future.

There is a Forum module as part of the core. It is light weight and forum has not yet been released with CCK-Views though possibly it can be done and probably debates are there. Still the Forum module is there in core. Similarly if someone picked up Acidfree as core image gallery it would be the best lean, lightweight solution extensible by Imagecache, Views whatever one wanted.

Anyway, I will be very happy if anyone posts a cck-views solution that is SIMILAR to Acidfree.

PS - I requested via email the Acidfree developer/maintainer to join in with his opinion if possible, at least there are plenty of Acidfree users ( see the project usage report above ) and I am not sure how they can move their per user galleries forward in time unless Acidfree keeps upto date. As the 6x version is working nicely for Drupal 6x probably there are not so much requests right now, but once D 7 starts to show up in another year I think these AF gallery users will pour in with their requests that is, if they bother to upgrade to D 7.

Michelle’s picture

I haven't used Acidfree. I was only going by what you said:

Those of you who have not tested Acidfree it is a simple one-module solution to provide gallery and per user gallery out of the box for Drupal 6x

If that's not the case, then the responses don't apply.

The core forum module is not a complete forum package but rather just one piece of the puzzle. If it was a complete package, AF wouldn't need to exist. ;)

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

Ummm. I sort of dislike when I have to make these threaded replies. It starts giving boxes and sub-boxes and they get lesser and lesser in width. LOL.

By simple one-module solution I meant you do not have to hunt for other modules to make it run.Taxonomy is already part of the core. And Image module is so common to me, otherwise it will be non-graphical site like those in the days of text-only browsers.

Compared to Acidfree, the current gallery module Node gallery needs Imagachache, which again needs ImageAPI, also you need Node Gallery Access etc. To use CCK-Views you need CCK, Imagefield, Views, Imagecache etc etc. I hope I am clear ;)

"The core forum module is not a complete forum package but rather just one piece of the puzzle" BUT it does meet the requirement of many people, similarly if AF is part of the core it will not be a complete gallery package but one piece of the puzzle, which can be extended by Views, contribs etc by those who want.

I have edited the words "single module" in the original post in case it confuses others like you. Thank you for pointing it out.

VM’s picture

With acidfree:

Can I choose one content type I want to be able to add the upload image field to?
Can I add fields to that content type that allows me to do things like locations and geocoding for gmaps?
Can I exapand on acidfree by using imagecache and display differnet sized derivatives in any possible way I want?
Can I use actions and triggers with acidfree?
Can I use rules?

Or am I confined by the settings that acidfree provides for itself?

The idea that being on a shared server doesn't allow one to use certain modules isn't quite correct. I happen to run 3 sites on shared servers, that uses views cck imageapi filefield imagecache and their dependencies on my sites.

Lastly there are some things coming in core that push modules like acidfree further into the blackhole. You state it's two years from now, which in the grand scheme isn't that far away and I actually believe it will be sooner. A module that doesnt have a maintainer is a liability for any site that deploys it especially if that person that runs that site doesn't have the skillset to fix bugs and keep it secure. If a security vulnerability arises.

The list you made with regards to other image options, isn't complete. Those numbers certainy don't take into account the people who don't use those modules to create an image gallery. I don't. CCK, Views, which would already be deployed for other reasons handles the bulk of creating the content type and listing the images.

I understand that if users aren't familiar with CCK and Views for one reason or another, this concept may be hard to grasp. If the modules are already part of my site doing other tasks, I may as well continue to use them for other things.

kaakuu’s picture

VM, you can do ALL of these. That is what I said several times before by mentioning the words normal "workflow". It uses a normal content type and you can follow Drupal workflow and DO ALL that you listed above in Acidfree. That is its charm!

I said twice to Michelle above that you can extend it by Imagecache. You can use Views too to show latest images by an user in his album on his profile page.

Of course, to believe me you have to do a test-run yourself.

While in Node Gallery, which is in current and active development at this very moment, I am not sure you can do these things.

I agree with you on the maintainability problem but I said in the above post I want to use ( see my use case ) it as read only access - no user input, no webform. Does security risks apply then? Iam eager to know this plus scalabilty issues.

VM’s picture

I'll have a play with it, I don't recall it being that interactive with core when I last used it with 4.7.x however, it's all moot without a maintainer.

fax8 was the originator I believe, and now the current comaintainer is obviously done with it too based on your statements. I'd never deploy it on a production site without a maintainer maintaining.

If you like the method that acidfree provides, thats great. I prefer using modules that are future proofing and actively being maintained.

WorldFallz’s picture

D7 code freeze is Sept iirc. Whether or not that's a 'far off proposition' depends on your relative definition of "far off". For me, its not.

As for views-- no, there's never any guarantee in open source. But I would put my trust in cck and views before acidfree. That's nothing against the maintainer or the module, just the way it is.

The great thing about the views/cck method for image galleries (as described by the excellent lullabot video you mention) is its flexibility. And yes, of course, it can be per user-- just like any other cck/node use case.

At this point I'm not really sure why you're making this such a big issue. Unless you're really just lobbying for someone to take over maintenance of the module-- which is unlikely since anyone with the skills to so will probably prefer the cck/views method, but you never know.

If you want to use acidfree by all means do it. Just don't post back to the forums in a year or so complaining that 'drupal sux' because you have no upgrade path due to that choice.

kaakuu’s picture

Thanks for your helpful comments.

I am not sure what big issue I have made but if I have I apologize to you personally.
I will be glad if you read this thread in entirety

http://drupal.org/node/503796#comment-1751822
http://drupal.org/node/503796#comment-1751316

I have been trying what you have said in http://drupal.org/node/503796#comment-1751316 and I will be very happy if you can help with how to make it "per user album" and have a good pagination.

My deadline for this project is within next two weeks and I need a per user gallery with the pagination I showed in the diagram. I am looking forwards to your help.

And I assure you I will not post anything like "'drupal sux" :)

VM’s picture

My take on Acidfree: (This will be a living document as I test this)

Image handling:
Dependent on the image.module

I can't add another imagefield to the image content type provided by the image.module (AFAICT)
I can't create my own content type and use acidfree as I am locked into the image content type provided by the image.module (AFAICT)

Video handling:
Dependant on the video.module if one want's video galleries.

What If I want a video and an image on the same content type?
from the looks of it, to do the above, I'd have to upload the image through the image content type, then reference the image via a filter in the body of the video content type.

Other media handling (Audio)

Pros:
Acidfree seems to provide some settings, that users who want a photo gallery would find beneficial.

(Unfinished)

kaakuu’s picture

VM, Thanks a lot that you have started to test it. I appreciate this so much.

However, I do not want to enter arguments but discussions are welcome. I had some specific questions in the first post and using Videos is NOT my use case. I am not deeply experienced in CCK but if CCK Imagefield does not go well with Image content it can be a bug of Imagefield or something that it needs to address. I see that "Imagefield is not compatible with image.module content types.". I will prefer something that has better compatibility and DOES NOT RESTRICT my usage to exclude certain content types. For example, if you need additional images to go along with image node in Acidfree you can pretty well use Upload, which is a core module. I cannot see any other use of Imagefield in an album.

So far as creating your content type CCK allows to do that and certain modules do not allow you to do that - for example, can you create your own content type and use it exactly as core Blog ?
Obviously CCK can let you create something like Blog. I think we are getting lost here. You are wanting to see the flexibility of CCK in Acidfree - if it was there Acidfree would be CCK itself, and one would not need CCK separately again. I am not sure but are we comparing apples to oranges here ?

I have a friend who uses Acidfree for per user album and have no problem in using Imagecache and Views with it. Acidfree also goes well with Book module if you want to "Outline". One purpose of module is customized solution rather than having to play with multitude of factors and set-up.

Even then, I will be happy to get a CCK-Views solutions, which is what I have said so many times in this thread.

VM’s picture

These are my notes. This isn't about having you address them in any way. You want a complete cck / views solution and I'm trying to work on that. In my way. To do that, I need to understand what acidfree can and can't do in comparison to views. What I can and can't do with it. Some of what I find may radically alter as I intend to edit the comment I already started. I prefer CCK so it's only natural for me to pick out what I can't do first. That's usually essentialy for me in my understanding of features.

Let me give you a use case for me. (Which is essentially the angle I've been testing from)
I needed a content type that allowed me to upload an imagefield, and audiofield and a videofield or to reference them and tie them together for a band site. The imagefield can now be used as an image anywhere in the site. Galleries, coverart for the audio or video.

So yea, I'm looking at this from a totally different perspective. Obviously everyones use case can be different.

You seem to think that I'm saying acidfree is "bad" to use. If it suits you and the other 600+ users using it, that's grrrrrrrrrrrreat!

kaakuu’s picture

Thanks a lot - I will have to go out now but will come back.
A quick note - If you are really using Imagefield it appears to have a longer and really bugging bug list http://drupal.org/project/issues/imagefield?text=&status=Open&priorities...

VM’s picture

how many users does imagefield have? = http://drupal.org/project/usage/imagefield
(more users more issues get filed, Doesn't necessairily mean that the module itself even has a bug but it does mean the module is actively used)

Are the maintainers active? (yes in this case there are multiple) = http://drupal.org/project/cvs/72560

Michelle’s picture

"how many users does imagefield have?"

Only 50 thousand... That's not that many more than acidfree. ;)

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

Thanks. I think I was comparing the per user or stand alone gallery modules.
Imagefield is used along with CCK and perhaps Imagecache, Views etc.

@Michelle
I am not sure I caught the meaning of ""That's not that many more than acidfree. ;)". The smili at the end means you say this lightheartedly which is good. At the same time constructive inputs will be welcome. For that matter, "Drupal" has even more usage than Imagefield.
Regarding constructive input I mean you as an experienced Drupaller can answer these questions for example, can there be any security problem if Acidfree is just used for read only access without any user input?

@VM - You are right about the stats. But I will now start to test if any of the reported Imagefield bugs hinders my purpose and whether it will be supportive of some contribs if I need in future. If not it will be fine to go ahead when there is some stable code of cck-views producing similar gallery.

VM’s picture

Regarding constructive input I mean you as an experienced Drupaller can answer these questions for example, can there be any security problem if Acidfree is just used for read only access without any user input?

A security exploit can be found at any time. Your files may be read only, but whatever users do is going into the database. That's another benefit to using modules that have multiple maintainers. There are more eyes on the code, more ways it gets used, more systems it's deployed on, faster bugs are found and fixed as well as security issues that may arise.

whether it will be supportive of some contribs if I need in future

That's the point I've been trying to make. Fields are going into core in Drupal 7.x with the field api, from what I've read. I'd venture the guess that it's also why the modules that provide fields have garnered so much activity over the past months. ex: filefield/imagefield/ so on so forth. Imagecache looks like it's trying to get in Drupal 7.x as well. Modules that won't end up working with imagefield and the like won't be modules worth using as far as I'd be concerned.

The features in acidfree : ie: user albums with finer grained controls (which I assume is why you like this module) may have to be torn out and turned into their own contribs. Although, I have an idea that there will be newer modules that fill these types of gaps. Maybe I am just being an optimist but with every release of drupal, some of the bigger more flexible ideas, rules, views, cck, fields, continue to grow allowing one to per-sey build their own modules without actually building a module. Think of how many modules were replaced with the release of views 2. Most every module that would be needed to create a list in 4.7.x and 5.x can be done in views. I tend to export my views and turn them into custom modules.

Sites I'm building, I want to be as "future drupal" as possible. I understand that it isn't 100% possible to do that, however, if a module like views (for example) were to be replaced by another, more powerful module (is that possible?) Someone would create an upgrade path from X to Y and in short time. Too many people use views for it just to go completely unsupported.

Michelle’s picture

I was just joking around with VM. I've pretty much given up on this thread as you seem set on using Acidfree no matter what anyone says anyway.

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

I appreciate jokes particularly when there is no fruitful things are coming out :)
However, I am sorry to say you did not notice two things. Sigh.

#
I am not set on Acidfree, but set on the features I need. If anything else provides what I need I am very much willing.

#
According to VM's advice I have started testing Imagefield and also posted the code below. I have posted diagrams of what I mean and what I need. It will be nice if you as a creator of Adv Forum can "glue" together Adv Gallery but I am afraid you may be too busy to do that except your support in these forums.
Anyways Adv gallery will be welcome :)

Michelle’s picture

Well, it sure does seem that way from the way you've been arguing in this thread. No, I don't have time to write a gallery module. I expect to use http://www.lullabot.com/articles/photo-galleries-views-attach or something similar on my site. I just got into this thread because you used advanced forum as an example of a monolithic module, which it isn't.

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

Discussion is NOT arguing, imho.
See the fuller perspective, read http://drupal.org/node/503796#comment-1751316 and ALSO notes in my other posts. I will appreciate if you do not pick only my negatives in my posts, if they are at all there.

And I do not understand what you mean by monolithic. I have NEVER used that word. I meant to say Adv Forum is a ready made solution though what it does can be probably done or assembled by one using various modules and/or Views etc etc. There is apparently no such ready made Adv gallery and one has to play and hit/miss/get the thing done by CCK-Views. This is what I meant. I am really sorry if that was not clear to you.

I tried the lullabot package and I noted it already in this thread or a related thread that it does not offer per user gallery or the pagination I am looking for.

I appreciate your time given in this thread.

Michelle’s picture

I meant to say Adv Forum is a ready made solution though what it does can be probably done or assembled by one using various modules and/or Views etc etc

You're just not getting it. Advanced Forum is just part of a forum "assembled by one using various modules and/or Views etc etc". It's the exact opposite of what you keep making it out to be.

Anyway, I can't waste any more cycles on this thread. I came in to make one comment to clarify and keep getting dragged back into it. I'm all done, now.

Good luck with whatever you end up using.

Michelle

kaakuu’s picture

thanks for pointing this. That is great news and surely it will be a great addition. However, it looks like all these things to get stabilized and to come in working condition it will take another one and half to two years. I need the gallery ( according to my use case ) up and running latest by middle of the next month, which means I have just around two weeks time in hand. That is why posted this.

If some heavy stuff like Imagecache does get into core, it necessarily does not mean one will have to enable them. Not everyone has the same amount of crowd or resources on shared boxes so lightweight modules, if actively maintained, may still continue to serve. true for VPS or dedicated these are no issues at all.

Incidentally, Acidfree has NO problem in adding various other CCK fields to its node type. Its just that Imagefield and Image are not compatible. But if Image is already there, and I can add more images if I need by Upload in any or all single node, AS WELL AS any text field, number field and such other CCK fields it serves my use case.

I will take some time to see if Imagefield can be bugfree for my purpose and wait to see if some codes come up to produce similar per user gallery with the type of pagination I need.

A security exploit can be found at any time. Your files may be read only, but whatever users do is going into the database.

Users will not be doing anything in this case. They will be reading (seeing) only - no comments, no input etc. I am not sure they can still tamper the database. If that is a possibility and confirmed by others too I take a note of it. And I will try to re-orient myself.

Added : I am trying with Imagefield. There may be some problem with AdobeImageready gifs but this may need more tests. Please see the picture. the first 3 diagrams show what I can have by Acidfree or what I plan to have, the fourth one shows how far I have been able to do by Imagefield. I need to have a list by Views which is OK but how to have per user gallery and the required pattern of pagination?

Please see the figure (oops, this forum lacks image attachment, why??) - http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/609/imagegallerybycck.gif

Below is the content type export using Imagefield, I am yet to try Views. If you have made some advancement please share. You may take a look at the export to see if there is something grossly wrong I made.

Added : In the meanwhile I am also taking a look at CCK gallery http://drupal.org/project/cck_gallery in case it has already done what we are trying but it seems from reading the developer's note there is not much interest in it to continue.

$content['type']  = array (
  'name' => 'picture',
  'type' => 'picture',
  'description' => '',
  'title_label' => 'Title',
  'body_label' => 'Body',
  'min_word_count' => '0',
  'help' => '',
  'node_options' => 
  array (
    'status' => true,
    'promote' => true,
    'sticky' => false,
    'revision' => false,
  ),
  'old_type' => 'picture',
  'orig_type' => '',
  'module' => 'node',
  'custom' => '1',
  'modified' => '1',
  'locked' => '0',
  'comment' => '2',
  'comment_default_mode' => '4',
  'comment_default_order' => '1',
  'comment_default_per_page' => '50',
  'comment_controls' => '3',
  'comment_anonymous' => 0,
  'comment_subject_field' => '1',
  'comment_preview' => '1',
  'comment_form_location' => '0',
);
$content['fields']  = array (
  0 => 
  array (
    'label' => 'img',
    'field_name' => 'field_img',
    'type' => 'filefield',
    'widget_type' => 'imagefield_widget',
    'change' => 'Change basic information',
    'weight' => '1',
    'file_extensions' => 'gif jpg png',
    'progress_indicator' => 'bar',
    'file_path' => '',
    'max_filesize_per_file' => '',
    'max_filesize_per_node' => '',
    'max_resolution' => 0,
    'min_resolution' => 0,
    'custom_alt' => 0,
    'alt' => '',
    'custom_title' => 0,
    'title_type' => 'textfield',
    'title' => '',
    'use_default_image' => 0,
    'default_image_upload' => '',
    'default_image' => NULL,
    'description' => '',
    'group' => false,
    'required' => 0,
    'multiple' => '0',
    'list_field' => '0',
    'list_default' => 1,
    'description_field' => '0',
    'op' => 'Save field settings',
    'module' => 'filefield',
    'widget_module' => 'imagefield',
    'columns' => 
    array (
      'fid' => 
      array (
        'type' => 'int',
        'not null' => false,
        'views' => true,
      ),
      'list' => 
      array (
        'type' => 'int',
        'size' => 'tiny',
        'not null' => false,
        'views' => true,
      ),
      'data' => 
      array (
        'type' => 'text',
        'serialize' => true,
        'views' => true,
      ),
    ),
    'display_settings' => 
    array (
      'label' => 
      array (
        'format' => 'above',
        'exclude' => 0,
      ),
      'teaser' => 
      array (
        'format' => 'image_plain',
        'exclude' => 0,
      ),
      'full' => 
      array (
        'format' => 'image_plain',
        'exclude' => 0,
      ),
      4 => 
      array (
        'format' => 'image_plain',
        'exclude' => 0,
      ),
    ),
  ),
);
$content['extra']  = array (
  'title' => '-5',
  'body_field' => '0',
  'menu' => '-2',
);

VM’s picture

Noone said "imagefield" was going into core. A fields api will be in core. just as part of content type creation from CCK made it into core in Drupal 5.x.

Based on my testing of D7, it wil not take 1.5 to 2 years for stability.

You say you need users galleries, but that users won't be doing anything. How will they be uploading images into their galleries? Is that not database interaction? Are they not being served a form? If not, you can do what you want with taxonomy and permissions on taxonomy with tac or taclite.

If you prefer the paging system in acidfree pull it out and use it elsewhere if possible, or simply use acidfree.

I don't have unlimted amounts of time to dedicate to this and certainly won't be put on a 2 week deadline for forum support.

Deploy acidfree. As previously stated by myself and others, there is no reason you can't use the tool you prefer that provides the tools you need for the job.

kaakuu’s picture

Thanks VM. There will not be any web form but user submission will be via email.
If I could pull out the paging system of Acidfree I would not be using this forum to seek help for code snippets. I did try but I am unable. After you and others have stressed Imagefield and related things I have started to look at it AS WELL AS try it, which I detailed in the above post. I once again thank you for your support so far.

VM’s picture

Then I don't understand what the "user galleries" are necessary for. If it's simply for separation there are other methods.

If its so users can choose to share galleries and allow others to upload into them and such then I can see why acidfree could be a solution.

Unless I still don't totally understand the workflow. Users email the image ...... what happens next.

Don't feel a need to explain it, I'm sure you have it all worked out and understand what you are doing and thats wonderful. I just don't totally get it, and thats ok too. Afterall I've only had 2 cups of coffee so far, so I've got some catching up to do.

kaakuu’s picture

You know what, you feel so friendly at the moment in this thread which perhaps I was missing from other correspondents. Users not only email but works are chosen from their blogs too to tell the truth (by the site editors)

Edited : I wrote about the plan and explained in brief to VM and I hope VM has read that already silently. Since this information has nothing to do with this thread and was sort of my personal details plan of operation I am removing this.

soul_discharge’s picture

Acidefree no longer works with Drupal 6 and removing it from your installation will destroy your database. http://drupal.org/node/354557

The drupal 6 acidfree dowload link should be disabled. That being said I really hope the maintainer returns or someone picks it up and fixes the issues. After having tried all the other galleries they either fall under jquery/inline popups (now everyone's galleries look and behave exactly the same), nodes for individual pictures (overkill), or complicated views hoop jumping with no to little pager customization. All I want is a simple gallery that shows file uploads and a customizable pager. Why is it so hard to find something so simple.

WorldFallz’s picture

I hope I don't regret popping back on this thread, lol. Just a couple of thoughts-- I always hear that nodes for individual images are "overkill" and users do all sorts of handstands to avoid them. Then a short while later, after they've chosen the latest and greatest non-node image gallery, they'll pop back in and want to enable tagging of single images, rating of single images, reviews of single images, comments on single images, all sorts of individual image handling, etc. In other words, back at images as nodes-- after wasting a significant amount of time with the non-node solution they then have to waste yet more time converting back to images as nodes.

The method described in the lullabot screencast (which is now the views_gallery module so it's even easier) is far and away the most flexible and future proof method available-- cck, imagefield, and imagecache are in d7 core and views isn't going anywhere either. It's also the basis for any type of related nodes functionality (ie products and reviews, artists and albums, etc). So it's incredibly empowering to learn.

I truly don't get the phobia of images as nodes (unless you're talking about hundreds of thousands of them), however, if you really, really want a simple gallery without individual images being individual nodes, just add a multivalue imagefield to a single "gallery" content type. Doesn't get much simpler than that.

mrbeau’s picture

I've been researching this topic recently and I'm trying to understand the difference of treating each image as a node versus using CCK and ImageField. If things are set such that ImageField only accepts 1 image, what is then the differences between the two methods?

WorldFallz’s picture

Nothing really-- and in fact, with imagefield in core for d7, images as nodes will just mean and 'image' content type with an imagefield set to accept 1 image. 'Images as nodes' just means 1 image per node regardless of the method used to implement it. At the moment there's just more than one common way (the 'image' module does this as well with core uploads).