Web Gallery Software
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: M-M on 10 Aug 2010 09:54 In article <xn0gxpso69d58z009(a)news.aioe.org>, "Mike Warren" <miwa-not-this-bit(a)or-this-csas.net.au> wrote: > >Photoshop Elements does a pretty good job. > > Thanks for the suggestion. > > Unless I'm missing something, it's pretty limited and doesn't support > auto resizing. I think "auto-resizing" is a function of the browser. Safari does it with any photo that is larger than the window. PE has a ton of other choices for layout. -- m-m http://www.mhmyers.com
From: Chris Malcolm on 11 Aug 2010 04:04 Russell D. <rmd(a)sfcn.org> wrote: > On 08/08/2010 08:43 PM, Mike Warren wrote: >> I have been on the lookout for some software web gallery software for >> several years, but everything I find has things I don't like. >> >> These are the main things I'm after: >> >> 1/ Usable on my own web site. >> >> 2/ Must not be tied to some other site or company remaining in existence. >> >> 3/ Low cost. >> >> 4/ A UI that allows easy uploading of photos and organization without >> needing any particular computer skills. This is so my wife can control >> her own gallery without needing to ask for help from me. >> >> 5/ Pictures automatically resize to fit in the browser window. This one is >> non-negotiable. >> >> 6/ Fast. >> >> 7/ High compatibility with different browsers etc. >> >> 8/ Configurable themes and colours. >> >> 9/ Photo descriptions must allow for clickable links. >> >> The closest I've found so far is FotoPlayer http://www.fotoplayer.com/ >> and have set up a test gallery to play with it: >> >> http://mike-warren.net/test >> >> It doesn't meet condition 2 above as it appears to rely on JAlbum. It's >> also slow, like all Flash based galleries, but it seems to me that Flash >> is active on more systems than JavaScript now days, and people mostly have >> fast enough connections that this is not as important as it once was. >> >> I have seen some commercial photographer sites that look very nice for >> me, but I suspect that they were custom made as there are no links to >> the software used. >> >> Photography is only a hobby for my wife and I, and I do not want to spend >> a lot of time creating and configuring our web galleries. >> >> So much so that I haven't updated our main galleries since 2005. :-) >> > Here's a big FWIW and maybe you don't care, but I usually don't spend > much time on Flash sites. My hope is that HTML 5 will mean the demise of > Flash. I know several people who will ignore any site using Flash as a matter of principle, unless they have a very compelling reason to have to use it. -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Prev: Leica X1, only compact approved by Getty Images Next: EVF's for novices |