ImageField: UI issues

I also have some UI tweaks for ease of use:

Place the fupload before all the images in the edit node form
Collapse the images section by default, people might get confused seeing two ways to upload.

I wrote some code which can be included in your hook_form_alter:

$form['fupload']['#weight'] = -3;
$form['field_images']['#type'] = 'fieldset';
$form['field_images']['#collapsible'] = TRUE;
$form['field_images']['#collapsed'] = TRUE;

Also, having an Image for the select images function can me misleading - some might want to click upload images, as that is what they are intending on doing. Perhaps using a plain text button or including some text as well. And you could also disable the upload images button until there are images to upload.

Thanks for the comments.

Also upload btn is at the bottom instead of the side.

This has a reason. You have first to check if everything is set correctly. After that, you can upload the images.

It should kick me out of node creation once node is created. Otherwise user might create multiple nodes

A message will appear and warn you that already images have been uploaded and you're able to add some additional. Where's the problem? Please give me some more reasons to change that.

I can no longer create a node without any pictures

That's right, because you don't really need a picture gallery without any images. Providing two buttons would be more confusing.

Re-arranging pics is now a multi edit ordeal.

Right, but this is an imagefield thing. (or also perhaps views).

clicking on done editing, on the second page should go to newly created node

That's not possible if a node is created for every single image.

Place the fupload before all the images in the edit node form.

Possible, but is this a general solution? Does anybody like this?

I know this, but as you see, Image fUpload wasn't always so powerful. But the users want to have this, for example the preview list page. Additionally, I don't think that it's very user-friendly if someone has to create a zip archive before being able to upload images.

But please explain what you don't like exactly and I will discus it with other users, other points of view.

P.S.: Some points you mentioned, will be changed in a future version. Please tell what you would like to change first.

I know that the upload button is a really critical point. But it's not so easy if we want to keep our functionality to automatically create gallery nodes.
Additionally, we would produce a much higher server load, if single storage mode is used because for every image one complete node has to be created. Consequently, if all nodes have to be created all at once, this would raise the server load.

Well I believe we can keep the functionality you have created but make it a little more clear to the end-user.

I have attached an image of what I would consider a more clear interface.

Your solution would be only possible if a existing node is edited (in order to keep the functionality).

Nevertheless, have a look at my 2 screenshots. Would this be better?

I think the new node is fine as you have it in #7's image.

I believe the edit node needs some work. I still think the term "Upload Images" might lead people to click that to begin the process instead of the image. It might appear as if the image is simply that, an image, and not a functioning button. Perhaps if all 3 were buttons, the "Upload Images" button is disabled until there is at least 1 image in the queue.

This is what it would appear as with nothing in the queue yet:

Select Images (active)
Upload Images (disabled)
Cancel All Uploads (disabled)

Thanks, now I realised where the problem is.
I didn't think that "image select" image would make any problems. A text button would be better I know, but we have to set an image button because it will be generated by flash. For security reasons, Flash only opens its file dialog if a flash movie button is clicked.

OK, your suggestion seems to be quite good. But would it also be "user-friendly" if a message appears which tells the user to select some images first by clicking the left-handed icon (in that case that nothing is queued)?

sure, that sounds good. You could put a message like "Click the 'Select Images' button below to begin".

Maybe put this inside the queue? Could go anywhere I guess.

OK, I changed it now a bit. Please have a look at the 2 new screenshots (attached). As you can see, the help text only appears if no image is in queue.

Does that popup alert only show if someone clicks the Upload Images? That doesn't show up right away, correct?

Also, not a deal breaker, but to me it seems the better way to phrase the alert would be:

"No images have been selected yet. Please click the icon on the left to queue some images."

I know, not a deal breaker, but otherwise, the user won't know what to do. Additonally, a help text will be provided directly, as you can see on the screenshot.

That really didn't answer my question: Does that popup alert only show if someone clicks the Upload Images? That doesn't show up right away, correct?

That's right, you already gave the answer, so I thought, it was clear.
It will only appear if no image is in queue and someone clicks that button.

Now, I change it a bit to combine two things: Now, it's possible to create a node without any images (have a look at the attached screenshot) and still the message will appear if no images are in queue and the button is clicked.

Looks good to me

Good news:
It's now possible to create nodes without any images using fupload. Have a look at the new version.

New version submitted: alpha 2.

I second that - it'd be really great if this could blend in with Imagefield more, and augment it more than replace it. Especially now that filefield automatically supports progress bars, the way it's setup it's almost a step backwards in usability, since you actually have to submit the node in order for it to upload, and don't get to see preview thumbnails. Simpler (and more seamless) would be so much better.

Simpler (and more seamless) would be so much better.

...and tons of harder to implement. Ok, I know we need some working on its usability, but before, some more important bugs have to be fixed.

If you look in the photos module (allbeit buggy as hell!) The one thing that works fantastically is the swf upload implementation. Perhaps you can benchmark off their code? I had to drop the photos module for now .. its a great idea but has a way to go before being really useful. Your module excited me cause I get the cool flash upload without all the headaches! Thanks a million for creating it!

Perhaps you can benchmark off their code?

No, FUpload is not really comparable with this one of photos module because it completely integrates in Drupal's Form API, so it would also accept CCK fields and Taxonomy directly.

But none of them has a preview list page where you can edit the uploaded images directly (taxonomy, ...), on the fly. This makes fUpload more complex than imagefield_zip and photos module.
I know, in some ways FUpload needs improvements concerning its UI.
But I have an idea how to fix it for the ImageField, not Image module. Let's see where I can take the time to realize it.

Subscribing. Trying the tweaks from #1 http://drupal.org/node/399066#comment-1345634