|
You can arrange images in sets from the set page, without Organizr. One of the grey options near the top is "Arrange...". Can't remember exactly.
Edited to add that I agree the order should follow previous settings until changed.
Originally posted 71 months ago.
(permalink)
iansand edited this topic 71 months ago.
|
|
Iansand: Thanks. That is probably a little faster than using Organizr but I still have to Load the Set. I have sets with 800 photos, and since it loads 'all' thumbnails, it's still a quite slow process. I'll have to start doing it that way though I guess.
Thanks again.
Posted 71 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'll add my weight to this idea.
I've said it before, but the same goes for the 'Sort by...' option of the stream in Organizr. It should also be sticky. I always want it sorted by date taken, but it always defaults to sorting by date uploaded - WTF? I challenge anyone to say that isn't backwards! The 'natural' property of the photo is when it was taken, not when I finally got around to uploading it....
Posted 71 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
More support for this idea. This seems like a really straightforward thing to implement. Most databases support a sort field and this field just has to be made sticky!
Posted 70 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'll happily nudge this one. I'm getting awfully tired of having to reorder my holiday set chronologically. It ought to just remember that that's its order.
Posted 69 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Yep. I'm with y'all on this one.
Posted 69 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
agreed with everything. i always have to sort my images and i always do the same thing.
Posted 69 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This might be of some use for some folks here
www.dopiaza.org/flickr/setmgr
Posted 69 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I too would love to be able to set the sort order of images in sets and then have it remembered. It is tiresome having to go through and change it each time you add pictures to a set.
Posted 65 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Using the new Uploadr to upload in date-taken order does add the photos to their respective sets in the correct (date) order. However, I still like to see this option so that if I'm adding to Sets from my stream I don't have to re-sort when I've finished.
Posted 65 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I would like to see this function added so i don't have to reorder sets everytime I upload
Posted 64 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I am so surprised that this isn't already an option, and would absolutely *love* to see it added... it would be especially useful for sets that get updated regularly, like my Project 365. Who'd've guessed that this didn't already exist?!
Posted 64 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Absolutely a fantastic idea. Can't believe Flickr has missed the boat on this one up to this point!
Posted 64 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'm surprised this isn't already implemented. This would be a great thing to have. Maybe this can be done via the uploadr if its a pain to do it via the organizer. Just have a checkbox by every set "sticky sort order" which would tell the uploadr to automatically re-order the set after adding photos to them. And make sure the uploadr remembers these settings.
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
This would save us tons of time, and is near the top of my wish list.
From Flickr's side, it would add a bit of database overhead to store the per-set preference, but I suspect it would be a net win throughput-wise, since it would eliminate the need for a lot of Load Set/Load Organizr requests that are being made only for this purpose... and even though this would admittedly add a join, the query to display sets has to ORDER BY something anyway.
Yes please!
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I agree. I don't have a problem with the order of the actual stream (in fact, I quite like it), but since sets are the place where we can display our photos in the order we want them to be seen, it would be nice that you could decide once in what order the set is and it would stick that way.
If it were possible code-writing-wise.
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
First of all, yes, I would like my sets to be able to remember that I have a designated order to them. Most sets I organize in order the pictures were taken, oldest first. But if this is implimented, I would also like to be able to turn off this feature for new photos added to the sets (ie. reset it to the way things are now). I have one particular set that is initially organized my usual way, but I have added variations of those photos to the end (greyscales, digital zooming, etc.). Sure, it wouldn't hurt to keep them all organized by date taken, but as a personal preference I like to have the set divided into originals + alterations without creating separate sets for the photos. It's something I may start doing whenever I go out on a photographic trek.
But yes, I'd like this as an automatic feature, so long as I can toggle it on/off.
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I can't believe more people don't want default sort order. I like my sets to have the most recent pic at the beginning, and I tire from updating the order every time I upload a picture.
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Nudging the thread, since I had posted about this elsewhere, and it was suggested I post here. This has been one of the two or three most annoying functionality voids in Flickr in the couple of years I've been using it. It should be a simple global user preference, but also not terribly difficult to implement on a set-by-set basis. I like seeing my most recent photos first in a set. Flickr has a great Uploadr tool that does so many things...but I'll still have to go into a set manually to resort after doing a new add. Just plain stupid, really.
Posted 63 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I also really really want this feature.
For me Flickr is the best photosharing site, but lacks this important function which other photosharing sites do have.
I really hope that Flickr will implement this function soon!
Posted 60 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'm all in on this one too, seen from a recently bumped FlickrHelp topic.
Posted 58 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Agreed.
Basically, what we want are "Smart Sets." Sets that remember the settings the user chose for it.
I sort my set by the date uploaded with the newest ones first. But every time I add new photos, it gets stuck in the last page.
Posted 58 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
shouldn't be a difficult feature to implement, shouldn't it? ;)
i'm with you here, i need it...
Posted 58 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Agree. I have a lot of sets and annoying to have to change the order for each new set. I always use 'order by date taken (oldest first)' as it is the natural flow of viewing photos; start clicking at the first and the click next (which would be taken at a later timer). The default order as Flickr sets makes no sense to me as a user.
Posted 58 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I do the opposite. Newest things at the top of the set. Difference in preferences is exactly why we want smart/sticky set ordering.
Posted 58 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Just throwing my 2 cents in. A default sort order for sets would be ideal. Can't image why 'newest first' wouldn't be the standard when that's the way the photostream works...
Posted 57 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
durtcom
Many sets tend to have more of a narrative... and it makes sense to follow them in oldest first order. But I think usage varies enough that sticky ordering is the real solution.
Posted 57 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
More requests here: flickr.com/groups/flickrideas/discuss/72157608264681301/
Posted 56 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'll throw my 2¢ in.
Set sort should be sticky. There should also be an account wide default separately. When I upload several or one set in either jUploadr or Flickr Uploadr the sets are always random, which is pretty much the most useless option ever. Perhaps it could be replaced by an interestingness option?
Posted 56 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Ditto. I understand the rationale behind not being able to edit the order in the photostream, and frankly, I kind of like that, but I agree with the others here, Sets are different. When I organize my sets by "date taken (newest first)", it should not put newly uploaded items with recent EXIF date stamps on them last. It should remember "date taken (newest first)" and put it at the top. That just makes sense.
When will this get fixed? Unlike some of the other functions of Flickr for which there is a rationale explanation for the way it works, the way Set ordering currently work just doesn't make sense. There's no conceivable explanation for why it puts "new" photos last when I've told it that I want them first. So, yes, this is "broken" and was simply implemented poorly when they started allowing you to set the sort order of Sets. It needs to be fixed ASAP.
Originally posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
mattvandyk edited this topic 55 months ago.
|
|
I noticed not a single staff member said anything in this thread. I wonder what that means.
I started a thread on the same topic but it was closed so here is what I say,
"It's been suggested before but the threads are closed. Maybe this is something that should be looked at a bit more by Flickr staff as it keeps coming up and here I am asking again. After adding images to a set I must go back into that set and arrange (by date taken) each and every time. Flickr dumps the images at the end of the set instead of the beginning. It's a hastle as with my largest set with more than 2000 images takes about 2 hours to arrange and then save. Could Flickr let me know that it is either impossible, possible, in the works or not of concern. Thanks"
So is anyone at Flickr actually acknowledging this issue/request/wish or does it fall on deaf ears?
Originally posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
growin edited this topic 55 months ago.
|
|
|
growin wrote I noticed not a single staff member said anything in this thread. I wonder what that means. It really doesn't mean anything. Because the decision-making and development processes are complicated, because staff have their own lists of ideas as well as the ones here, and because they generally don't want to raise expectations unduly, Flickr staff tend to keep pretty mum about the idea suggestions and where they're going. Occasionally they'll ask a couple of questions, let us know something really isn't possible, or tell us something is actually on "the list" (which could mean it'll be here "soon" -- that's in quote marks for a reason!), but they don't tend to be really active participants in the group. They do read it, though, and in theory (and almost as much as that in practice!) they add a little note in their posts here that they're staff.
Posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
ok, well, then maybe this topic should be a "system fix" issue as opposed to an "Idea". I would rather have this than stats and it's almost like someone forgot this in the original configuration. It is extremely frustrating and time wasting. The original post here is July 2007.
Hello Flickr Staff! Are you there?
Posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
A handful of people supporting this idea in the past 15 months does not make it "high priority", especially when the homepage/activity is still borked for many people.
[I am (not) staff]
Posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Arty, there are vastly more than "a handful of people supporting this idea in the past 15 months". Do a search. There are other threads on the topic both in the "Ideas" section and the main section. Some have been closed, some have not.
Unless someone can provide even a quasi-legitimate rationale behind putting recently taken photos at the END of a Set which has been "arranged" by "date taken (NEWEST FIRST)", this is not an "Idea" -- this is a DEFECT in the way the system operates in desperate need of a FIX.
To whom do we direct bugs? That would be a much better place to bring this to Flickr's attention than "Ideas". Again, this isn't a "I wish Flickr would add Feature X, Y, Z" (which is what "Ideas" is for) -- this is a "I wish Flickr would FIX their DEFECT in the way it disregards 'arrange by' orders when it adds new photos to a Set".
--Matt
Posted 55 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
bump.
So this still isn't solved? This really should be fixed!
Posted 52 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I would like to see this feature too.
Predictably I have my own flavour of the original request...
Photos in a Set shown newest days first but for each day to be grouped by photos shown in the order I took them (oldest first).
It'd be boring if we were all the same :-)
Originally posted 51 months ago.
(permalink)
gonnahavemesomefun edited this topic 51 months ago.
|
|
Still no action on this very reasonable request, I see. It's the one fly in the Flickr ointment for me: Every time I add photos to a set, I have to go into the organizer, open the set and fix the ordering. When I'm uploading (as I often am) dozens of images across multiple sets, this becomes pretty time-consuming.
Posted 47 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I think Yahoo has given up on life. I have to arrange the photos in my set everytime I upload a new picture? Ugh.
Oh snap... this is a standard sort of feature that tons of people want from over 2 years ago??? Double Ugh.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Count me as +1 for this idea.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Are the people supporting this idea currently using "arrange by most recent upload first"? Since I always have images in my set filed as "arrange by date uploaded (oldest first)" I rarely need to change anything. I can see how it would be annoying for people who want to go against the default layout.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@Arthur
I suspect yes. I know "newest first" is my method, and it's supremely annoying to add photos any way except organizer (which you can just drop them at the front). And organizer is annoying at times for it's own host of reasons.
What's worse, large sets can't be re-ordered outside of organizer (that option goes away after a certain size)... so if I add anything to those I am forced to fire up organizer just to make one sorting request. :-(
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Two years after I first searched for this topic on Flickrideas, and it still hasn't been implemented. I sometimes get the sense that, like their counterparts on FaceBook, Flickr established user forums to keep us out of their hair.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Organisr, like many of flickr's tools (slideshows, profiles, testimonials, image sizes) is (over)due an update. Only staff know if it's a priority.
I personally think it's better to iron out some of these long-existing "bugs" than keep creating new features (e.g. galleries, wonderful as they are).
What's the point of building new features all the time if all the old ones are broken? :/
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Add me here too. Just about every picture uploaded goes into 4-5 sets, and the order is never the sort I have already defined for the set. So 20 minutes later, something that should have taken 20 seconds is finally done.
I could then easily add to sets from the picture interface itself rather than Organiser.
Given Organiser's ability to drop into a specific position, I could understand the difficulty in implementing this within that environment, though perhaps a "natural order" panel at the bottom of the screen would allow each picture to be dropped into the right place.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Like many people, I like adding photos to sets and sort them from new to old, so that when people browse, the see content with the least exposure first.
It's great that there's a quick arrange button directly on the set so there's no need to use the Organizer. However, what would be *really* great is if there is a preference somewhere to set your photo add default to, say, always sort oldest to newest.
vimeo.com has this functionality for their albums and channels, and it saves a lot of time and effort to keep things in order.
Other appropriate default sort preferences would be:
+ alphabetical by title
+ date sort new to old (taken)
+ date sort old to new (taken)
+ date sort new to old (uploaded)
+ date sort old to new (uploaded)
+ interestingness (ascending)
+ interestingness (descending)
Originally posted 43 months ago.
(permalink)
See-ming Lee 李思明 SML edited this topic 43 months ago.
|
|
+1
Every time I add new photos to an existing set, they're added at the end of the set, which makes no sense. So each time, I have to re-order the set so the new ones show at top. It shouldn't work that way.
And, I totally agree with Arty Smokes, that existing functionality should be tweaked/fixed *long* before staff worries about inventing or rolling out new features that weren't particularly requested.
Posted 43 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Add me to this obvious request and a ridiculous oversight. It drives me crazy having to re-order a large set every time I add to it. I guess this started when flickr-lords decided that sets were static things - you made a set of last Saturday's party or Beryl's wedding, and selected the order and that was that. Never adding another photo again.
But this is not how most people use many sets, like my "one of each species of bird that I photograph" set. I've had to leave it at default order just so I don't go crazy re-sorting every day, but this is NOT how I want to present them.
Despite what was written above, I don't know why it is not possible for flickr-lords to make a statement of status about often requested fixes like this. eg. "We agree it's a good idea but priorities suggest it won't be implemented for 2 years at the earliest". It would save many of us from much frustrated ignorance, and save us posting pointlessly.
Posted 43 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Yeah, +1 to me. At the moment you can either drag them in on the set overview page and the go into each one and resort, or go into each set individually and drag the new images to the correct location.
Both of these options are annoying.
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1
Posted 42 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1
Posted 41 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I hope I won't get shouted at for bumping this (I'm a very delicate little flower) but it's still bloody annoying every time I use Organise.
I don't ask much. I don't even like doughnuts much. But PLEASE, think about putting this on your todo soon list, or baby otters everywhere will cry :'o(
Posted 41 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I won't shout at you Rob. :-)
This is one of those rare long-standing requests that doesn't have any reason *not* to do it (unless I missed one above). It looks like every one is in favor, the coding wouldn't be hard, and it would help everyone...
Posted 41 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
wow, I have been wanting this function since I joined flickr nearly 4 years ago. This is the first time I have bothered to track down any discussions about it.
I've always thought that it was extremely illogical to have new photos placed at the end of sets as the default. I dont think I use that for any of my sets. Themed sets I always want newest photos to appear at the top. For my vacation photos I like to arrange them in order taken, oldest first.
As with most everyone else here it seems that setting your own defaults for each set would be very useful and a big time saver. It really does seem an oversight to not have included this functionality from the beginning, but still I dont see anything changing. Frustrating...
Posted 40 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
PLEASE fix this issue!
I hate having to reorganize a set every time I upload a picture.
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Another +1. This has been driving me crazy, especially when adding a photo to multiple sets.
I'm surprised to see this topic opened nearly 3 years ago, and it seems like such a simple fix.
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Totally! On the same lines, perhaps give the ability to have a set randomly-order itself when you add a new picture, for those of us who don't go for time-organized content.
-D
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I couldn't read absolutely all comments, but there are some of us who do NOT sort by date, but by subject. If all my photos were always automatically sorted by date, it would be very tiresome. But, then again, my sets are not overly large. What gets me, and many comments at the beginning of this thread imply this too, is that when I add a photo to a set (via the image, and not organizr, which takes too long) it always goes to the end of the line and not to the beginning. Then I have to work my way backwards up the set dragging the photo.
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1 please.
mentioned above:
You can arrange images in sets from the set page, without Organizr. One of the grey options near the top is "Arrange...". Can't remember exactly.
Yes, this was an useful option; there was a drop menu with which you could reorder the images with one click. Unfortunately, this useful drop menu has disappeared a few days ago, and now is mandatory to sort the sets through the Organizr :-(
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
"Unfortunately, this useful drop menu has disappeared a few days ago"
Oh no it didn't!!
*Screen shot deleted after it served its illustrative purpose :-)
Originally posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
Patrick Costello edited this topic 39 months ago.
|
|
|
Patrick: Ah! It seems it dissapeared only in private sets ("only for family" set, in my case):
Originally posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
ovillan edited this topic 39 months ago.
|
|
|
Works on my private sets too. Though I don't have any set "only for family".
I suggest you post in the Help forum.
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
OK, I made that screen shot for family only and added it to a test set. I still got a drop down menu for arrange. So it's just you!
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Patrick: Yes, I checked my other private sets it right now and the drop down menu is shown. The set where this menu is not shown reached recently 800 photos. The (big) number of pictures is the only difference with respect to other sets, so maybe that's why the drop down is disabled. Thank you Patrick :-)
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Interesting. I don't have any sets with 800+ images, but it sounds like a bug to me, rather than any intentional change. I would have said that arrange options were more critical with very large sets. I was amused to see I could "arrange" my test set containing exactly one image :-)
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
ovillan said: “The set where this menu is not shown reached recently 800 photos”
I have several sets that large. The "Arrange" drop-down menu does not appear on the set page for very large sets. Instead, clicking "arrange" will take you to the set page in Organize, where the drop-down menu still works. :-)
Originally posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
Wil C. Fry edited this topic 39 months ago.
|
|
|
That sounds less like a bug then. Obviously large sets need additional resources while sorting, so I guess it has to be done under the Organize shell for some good technical reason.
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Patrick Costello said: “That sounds less like a bug then”
Right. :-)
I was only clarifying for ovillan's purposes...
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I usually create sets according to which date or events I took those photos; so I have lots of sets, usually I feel okay to use "drag and drop" when I put my sets in a collection, and usually the sets are created one by one, so the order is usually not a big problem for me. Until today, I find out 1/3 of my 230 sets are in a mess(for no reason, don't know if anyone has the same issue?) and drag them aroud is not very convenient way to do that, especially we can't drag some of them all together, only one by one.
Hope Flickr could do something about arranging the sets in a moe convenient, efficient way. For example, make a list of the sets, click the button on the side, choose to move up or down, for people usually don't name the title by date or alphabet. And maybe a better function to sort the set by alphabet or by date created. Since most of the user are PAYING for the pro account because they have more photos, more sets to upload, Flickr should do something about it!
Posted 39 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1 for the original suggestion.
Once I decide on how I'd like to sort the photos in a set, I tend to keep them sorted that way. So it'd be nice if photos added to that set were automatically sorted into their "correct" positions.
Posted 37 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I'm sorry I haven't got the time to read all the comments on this idea, but I do agree with the original suggestion (as a matter of fact same goes for the photostream; it's all messed up if you upload different types of images [textures, photos, ...]). Hope Flickr does something about this.
Posted 34 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Originally posted in a separate discussion.
Sets that automatically organize photos they contain.
For 5 years, I have been wanting for my sets to organize themselves automatically. That is, I want the photos within the sets to re-order themselves according to how I set the parameters.
All this time, I have been frustrated whenever I post a photo because it takes so much time to re-order the photos within each set in which I add the photo.
I have my Recent Additions set in the order of last posted photo first. I have all my other sets in the order of last taken first.
I like to keep my sets refreshed on a regular basis. So each time I post a photo or every couple of photos, I have to go through each set to which I recently added at least one photo to organize it. I have to spend quite a long time processing each re-order. It is very time-consuming.
I would like to be able to set the parameters for each set to organize itself the way I want and just let the work be done automatically each time I add a photo to each set.
I am sure this can be done easily. I am hoping others can express the same need.
I want sets that organize themselves automatically the way I want each time I add a photo to them.
Originally posted 34 months ago.
(permalink)
!MimosaMicheMichelle! edited this topic 34 months ago.
|
|
I am surprised that in the 3 years that this has been an active topic here that this probably simple thing to code and implement has been rolled out. A simple interface of "Do you want Flickr to remember your set order the next time you post to your sets?" would be all anyone needs to see. As others have said, for every photo I have posted in 5-6 years I have had to re order the set it goes into. And with bigger sets, sometimes it lags doing it. Is there a technical reason why it can't be done for sets I missed somewhere in the posts above?
Posted 34 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Hey guys...
I just got through a couple of weeks with the Flickr "techy" guys, just to be told this morning that an "Auto-arrange Default" is not available, and that I should post my idea here !!! LOL !!!
Looks like the discussion has been going on for YEARS, and Flickr doesn't listen... So why should they start now... It was a problem writing in words what I needed, so they kicked me "upstairs" and one of their "brainiacs" needed pictures in the form of screenshots to understand what I needed... The thread is like 5 pages long !!!
I totally agree that it's a pain in the butt to always have to go back to your "Sets" in order to auto arrange them, and why once you say that you want "all new pics to be added to the front", that it can't do it, and adds them to the back...
OK, rant over...
Sigh...
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I was just thinking, a variant on this idea would be to have a set-level or account-level setting for "always add photos to the beginning/end of a set." I order my sets once, and then new photos/uploads usually get inserted at one of the ends. Right now, they always get inserted at the end, when sometimes what I want is for them to be inserted at the beginning. (I suppose this applies to what happens when I add photos to sets via the Actions menu on the photo page.)
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
kitby edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
|
|
kitby said: “a variant on this idea would be to have a set-level ... setting for "always add photos to the beginning/end of a set."”
I could live with that.
For now, I'm using SuprSetr (found it in the App Garden) to auto-arrange my sets. As long as your set items share the common tag, that app can auto-manage the set for you. I've been pretty happy with it, but still wish this would be native to Flickr....
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Sorry, but not everyone wants this automatic arranging for all sets. An example: before and after images of a neighbourhood with lots of construction work. Some images are random, but the dates are not so important as the different locations, in the same area. So a fixed set order would make this project very difficult. Unless I collected all the photos first, and THEN started the set, but that is not the way I am going about it. The set is a work in progress, and I like to compare different structures and their building progress. I cannot foresee what I will photographs when there, as lighting, etc. plays a role. So, the idea of sorting by date or some preset order would not be interesting at all for this project. Quite the contrary.
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Ange Halle said: “Sorry, but not everyone wants this automatic arranging for all sets.” I was assuming that auto-arranging, as described in the original post, would be optional for each set.
Originally posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
kitby edited this topic 33 months ago.
|
|
|
Ange Halle said: “Sorry, but not everyone wants this automatic arranging for all sets.”
Currently, Flickr already automatically arranges your sets (new images added at bottom), and then you have to manually un-sort it into an order you prefer.
We're just asking for more options in the auto-arranging. One of those options would be "let me sort the set just like I always did."
Posted 33 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Do want!
Posted 32 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
My photo-stream has been automatically alphabetised by title, thus William Burroughs-ing the narrative stream of most of the comments I put beneath 'em, and while I don't consider this *entirely* inappropriate, it's slightly annoying even so. Consequently, @./martijn: same!
Posted 31 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I definitely second that!
www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157625339638649/
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
This is still my #1 most-desired feature request, glad to see others want it too. :-)
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1.
I haved a couple of sets in progress where I wrote in the description that the newest ones are at the bottom. Starting to realise that as these sets continue to grow, that may become cumbersome for the viewers.
Especially people who are not regular Flickr users.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Agreed, i have a daily photo blog which makes no sense if it is ordered oldest to newest which the flickr auto organizer insists on doing. so everytime i upload i have to reorder it manually.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
omg. This has been going on for three years? it's just unbelievable. Every single day I have to go through the arranging thing. So much for being a pro user. I feel like all of us pro users are being laughed at.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"This has been going on for three years?"
Some threads for much longer. :-)
However, this is one of the few threads I've seen that doesn't have any (or not very many) arguments against the idea.
I'd like to think staff is toying with the idea, kicking it around, and it will be added any day now. :-)
(But they won't comment to say so, until it's released.)
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Wil C. Fry wrote However, this is one of the few threads I've seen that doesn't have any I thought I'd take up the gauntlet, play Devils Advocate and mix my metaphors and think of things against the idea.
I've totally failed though
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
+1
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
@: biggest argument would be technical (I hazard to guess). Every image uploaded to a set with this applied would trigger a background process to reorder - a potentially significant load, and potentially with issues (eg: loading 100 shots to a number of sets all with this, multiply out to the entire Flickrverse and you'll see the issue). Requiring user interaction to force the sort is a means to increase friction in the process to reduce the requirements at the backend (ie: this will likely be a financial tradeoff - and also require consideration for high volume times and other points where background processes may be paused or dropped and the impacts on the user expectations of functionality).
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"Every image uploaded to a set with this applied would trigger a background process to reorder"
That's what I thought at first, too.
But... The sets *already* have an auto-sort (add image to end of set). My suggestion is that there would be more than one auto-sort available.
Therefore, adding an image to a set would not trigger anything more tedious than what already exists.
For example:
1) I tell my set to always sort in order of date taken, with newest image first.
2) When adding another image to the set, it simply adds the newest image into the correct slot.
(I'm not a programmer, but I do realize this would require adding quite a bit of code somewhere on the site, and I know it would require updating the FAQs, etc.
But from a layman's perspective, it seems since the auto-sort is already there, adding images to an unwanted position, then the auto-sort could just be tweaked/expanded, so the new image would be added to the desired position instead...)
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@: pushing an element to the end of an array is trivial - this is what's happening at the moment. Easiest way is to get the size of the array for the set and the position is given as the size (position is zero-indexed).
Requiring resort necessarily needs to go through the entire stack.
Likewise removing an image from a set necessarily requires a stack redo - however this is easier as you need only decrement the position values of elements *after* the removed element (this does not require comparisons across the collection).
sortvis.org/index.html <-- a good simplification of the requirements for sorting, different methods and what's needed.
"Reorder" is the same as "in the correct slot".
Caveat: I do not know the internal workings of flickr - but have experience in DB design and believe I can recreate.
Originally posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
'ju:femaiz edited this topic 30 months ago.
|
|
|
'ju:femaiz said: “Every image uploaded to a set with this applied would trigger a background process to reorder” Would doing the reordering in the viewer's web browser work any better?
Or, another variation: Do the automatic reordering in the background, but only once a day, similar to how the information at the bottom of the "overall" stats page is updated once a day.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
kitbysaid:
Would doing the reordering in the viewer's web browser work any better? Yeah, I thought about that too (I was considering writing a userscript which would trigger a re-sort each time items were added to a set). I think the problem you'd run into is how to deal with very large sets. In order to sort client-side, you would need to download the sorting criterion (date,title, view count or whatever) for each of the photos in the set.
At the moment, flickr.photosets.getPhotos returns a maximum of 500 items per call, so for very large sets that would take quite some time. Caching may help a little, but would break horribly once you started editing photo metadata or if you tried to sort by a frequently changing measure (e.g. view count).
Add to that the fact that many users prefer using desktop or other third party upload tools, and I think you're left with no choice but to do the sorting at the Flickr end.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@: can of worms there wrt user expectation.
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
"Do the automatic reordering in the background, but only once a day"
That would be fine for me. :-)
"Requiring resort necessarily needs to go through the entire stack."
I guess that makes sense to my layman's mind. What I was envisioning though is each set having some kind of index file (probably they already have them) in Flickr's servers, so adding a new image to the set would just add a line to the index file (and the index file would auto-sort according to my parameters)...
"(I was considering writing a userscript which would trigger a re-sort each time items were added to a set"
Currently, I use SuprSetr (in the App Garden) to auto-sort my sets, but that requires running a separate application on my computer, and it requires remembering to run the separate application after I've added images to the sets. There are other problems with this method as well... which are better discussed in the forum for that particular app.
Thanks, all of you programmers for chiming in here. :-)
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Yet another variation: Reorder the set whenever photo(s) are added, except for (very) large sets*, which are reordered in some background/offline task. The situation would be similar to how the tag editing interface on Flickr works.
*What constitutes a "very large" set, out of curiosity?
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Actually, it just occurred to me what the magnitude of the problem might be: A set would potentially have to be reordered whenever a photo is added to it or whenever the metadata for one of the photos already in it is modified. For example, if a set is automatically ordered by upload date, modifying the upload date for a photo already in the set should trigger a reordering.
At that point, doing the reordering on the client side becomes ridiculous because every app and user interface would have to remember all the myriad of ways in which a set reordering might be triggered. From that perspective, it seems preferable that only Flickr worry about automatically reordering sets. Depending on how often photos are added to sets and how often their metadata is modified, I can imagine that the only practical solution is either to have users explicitly force a reordering (i.e., leave the situation as it currently is) or to reorder sets periodically, in the background (e.g., once a day).
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
@: you're starting to understand the driver to have it be user-initiated :)
@: the nominal way to set up the relationship between image + set and have a position (set contents all have positions in the set) simplified would be:
ID | PHOTO_ID | SET_ID | POSITION
So when you add a new element it will necessarily go to the end of the stack to prevent a collision of the new addition with any other element. This then requires the user to reorder manually by user intervention.
When you remove a member of the set you remove at position X then in pseudocode:
for ITEM in SET_PHOTO_RELATIONSHIP
POSITION = POSITION - 1 if POSITION > X
end
Now, that is easy when you compare it to "place the image in the set at some position" because it actually means "place the image in the set and then reorder the lot".
Posted 30 months ago.
(permalink)
|
Flickr Ideas /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Flickr Ideas discussion threads