NOT have assigned to additional cats pics duplicated in thumb filmstrip

mjm · October 15th, 2005, 04:43 PM

Would it be possible to NOT have pics that have been assigned to additional categories showing in duplicate in the thumbnail filmstrip?
I've been so looking forward to using this feature, but after trying it, I've had to put it on hold ...

Thanks,
~ Mark

Chuck S · October 15th, 2005, 05:08 PM

You would need to edit showphoto.php and in the queries where it grabs images from photos table for that and add this

AND storecat='0'

mjm · October 15th, 2005, 05:22 PM

Freekin far out! You're incredible Chuck!
... will need to wait till my more significant other returns on Monday to implement

Thanks!
~ Mark

Carolem · November 5th, 2005, 07:47 PM

Is there an easy way to find these queries in showphoto.php ?

Quote:

You would need to edit showphoto.php and in the queries where it grabs images from photos table for that and add this

AND storecat='0'

(I am still quite a novice at this....)
Carolem

Chuck S · November 6th, 2005, 01:49 AM

Well the queries are numerous edits

it is the lines if you look at the code where the next and prev are formed

Carolem · November 6th, 2005, 02:06 AM

I had tried - I found 9 lines that looked like queries for photos and I added

AND storecat='0' at the end of lines
191, 193, 196, 199, 202, 205. 219. 231 and 235
but I got an error message saying I had an error in my SQL syntax near 'AND storecat='0" at line 1

Database handle: Resource id#7

(so I put back the functional file)

I could try again tomorrow evening,
Carolem

Bill Thebert · November 23rd, 2005, 12:00 PM

This is important to me as well.

I am experimenting with PhotoPost 5.21 for use on a site containing action photos of the local professional hockey team. If I can solve this problem, I will be purchasing my THIRD PhotoPost license.

Top-level "categories" are:

Photos by PLAYER
and
Photos by GAME

There are sub-categories for each player on the roster, and for each game on the schedule.

Each uploaded photo is "filed" under AT LEAST two categories (a player name and a specific game), or more if the image contains multiple players.

It looks pretty silly to see each thumbnail two or three times under "Recent Uploads", or when one clicks on a specific day in the "calendar PAL", etc.

In fact, I can't imagine ANY scenario where I would want PhotoPost to behave the way it does now in this respect. The beauty of databases is at least in part to be able to slice & dice my *views* of the data in different ways -- WITHOUT actually duplicating data. Right?

PhotoPost seems to be creating DUPLICATE image records, and treating them like separate entities, rather than just different views of ONE image.

Comments appended to a photo should (IMHO) appear regardless of which "category" one used to arrive at the photo. As it is now, there are actually two "copies" of a photo stored, and comments appear on only one or the other. Same issue for edits to the description, keywords, etc. -- all must be performed TWO OR MORE TIMES, in order to update all "copies" of an image. This feels like bad design to me.

The advice above is not adequate for me (a PHP novice) to correct this problem and get PhotoPost to behave in a way that make more sense to me.

Can I get more specific edits, please?

Chuck S · November 23rd, 2005, 12:31 PM

well this thread is about the showphoto next prev image blocks and post 2 has the answer

You need to add that to every query between lines 185-235 on showphoto.php to not have duplicates shown

As far as on the feature thumbs on the index etc then add the code in post 2 to the queries in the function display_gallery in pp-inc.php

hope this helps

Bill Thebert · November 23rd, 2005, 02:16 PM

Thanks for jumping back in on this, Chuck.

Just to be *really* explicit, you're saying I need to change, for example, lines 186 & 187 from:

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

to

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

Is this correct?

And that I need to make similar changes somewhere in php-inc.php?

Here's function display_gallery. It appears to this novice to contain several "queries" -- many of which already include the phrase "AND storecat=0" (*without* the single quotes around the zero).

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

Please forgive my ignorance, but I'm still not exactly clear what you're telling me to change here. I could use *explicit* direction.

And if I do this, will this change at all the fact that the photo count in the statistics is artificially doubled? Or the fact that I have to double & triple maintain the database when I alter/edit a description of a photo that is filed in two categories? Will folks be able to comment on ONE photo, and have that comment appear in all three categories under which that photo appears?

I think I'm asking about a big-picture, database-design question. One that probably can't be solved with a simple edit here or there.

I think what I'm asking about revolves around the fact that there are duplicate lines/records created in the 'photos' table whenever an image is cataloged in multiple categories. Wouldn't it be wiser (and better "normalized" in dbm lingo) to have just ONE record for each photo?

Chuck S · November 23rd, 2005, 03:04 PM

well display_gallery already has the storecat='0'

In your showphoto queries through the lines suggested the code I meantioned would be with the other AND statements. You have it after the sortcode which is not right

Bill Thebert · November 23rd, 2005, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck S

well display_gallery already has the storecat='0'

In your showphoto queries through the lines suggested the code I meantioned would be with the other AND statements. You have it after the sortcode which is not right

I give up.

Two people (CaroleM and myself) have asked for exact & explicit instructions on what to change, and you'll still only hint at it. She hasn't been able to accomplish her goals based on your feedback, and neither have I.

It would be like me trying to coach you into writing grammatically-correct German by saying:

"Conjugate the irregular verb in the dependent clause to the third-person plural. Morover, your choice of prepositions is incorrect. You're using the accusative case, and it requires the dative case.

"

Can you write proper German, now that I've told you how?

Does your company need to be hired/paid in order to tell us *exactly* how to correct this anomaly? If so, tell me how much?

You've conspicuously not responded to my questions about the bigger database-design issue. Do I need to start a new/separate thread in order to discuss this?

Chuck S · November 23rd, 2005, 03:49 PM

This thread is about a hack the person wants to achieve. MJM and Carole are famous for there need to change the default working of the code and I assist where I can.

There is no anomaly in the code there are suppose to be multiple photos shown if you use the additional cats thing. This is the design of the entire function. It is suppose to act like 3 different photos.

We do not support code modification which this whole issue is about I am just being nice here and trying to give pointers.

Honestly I don't think I can be any more explicit. I stated the exact line beginning and end that you need to modify every query between that and add AND storecat='0'

Your posted an example query and I replied that it needed to go before the sortcode with the rest of the AND statements. You want an example try this

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

Give that a try. As far as your other question that is how it is designed. 3 queries since it is suppose to be 3 photos and only one photo on disk. Just how it is designed to allow 3 photos and only 1 photo on disk to be used so it saves space. You need a photo insert for each additional cat

Bill Thebert · November 23rd, 2005, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck S

This thread is about a hack . . .

There is no anomaly in the code there are suppose to be multiple photos shown if you use the additional cats thing.

I guess we just disagree about whether this behavior is a "feature" or a "bug", and therefore about whether we're requesting a "hack" or a "fix", respectively.

I've been a licensed PhotoPost user since the earliest Perl-version days. This is the first application where I've really wanted a "photo database" as opposed to a "collection of albums". Big difference.

And though I am not a skilled code-writer, I nevertheless *have* been involved in numerous database design projects -- the largest of which was an enterprise-wide database of marketing documents/deliverables for IBM.

Let's imagine a hypothetical database consisting of 100 documents. Each has an author, a document "type" (e.g., a white paper, an application brief, etc.), as well as numerous other characteristics. Each document may also pertain to one or more specific *products* (or services).

Each document in the database is flagged, so that the user can view all docs pertaining to "Product A", or all those pertaining to "Service Q".

If each of those 100 documents describe TWO different products/services, it would be bad database design to DOUBLE the number of records -- and to falsely report that the database contained TWO HUNDRED documents. Don't you agree?

And if the user wanted to view "all documents that are new this week", it would be bad design to show him each new document TWICE (or even more times), just because each new document pertained to more than one product or service. Isn't that obvious?

If I wanted to correct a typo in the description of a document that pertained to SIX different products, is it reasonable to force me to make SIX SEPARATE UPDATES (since we've duplicated the data five additional times in the database)?

I hear you loud & clear when you say that "this is the way it is", and that photos are *supposed* to be duplicated in the database, and they're *supposed* to show up twice (or three times, or four times). But I'm suggesting that this design should be reconsidered.

Your design works JUST FINE as long as each photo belongs in only ONE category. It's great as a "collection of albums". But it's not working as an "searchable image database".

I'm going to copy this post over into the "suggestions" forum.

Chuck S · November 23rd, 2005, 05:13 PM

Well yes I can only state what is by design this is suppose to do but I hear you how you want it to work.

Multiples do not show on the features but on the following scripts showmembers and the thumbnail strips in showphoto they are treated as separate photos. Just how Michael wrote this feature. 3 inserts in the database and use of the storecat function to save diskspace by using the ability to only store one photo on disk to represent up to all 3 photos in separate cats.

Perhaps this is about as clear as I can be to say how to modify your code.

Sorry I can not post php files it is against company policy all I can to is post code blocks

In showphoto.php as stated lines 185-237 you can replace with this block

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

mjm · November 26th, 2005, 04:13 AM

Chuck wrote ...
>> MJM and Carole are famous for there need to change the default working of the code and I assist where I can.

Where's the :blush: smilie? Thank you many times over!
I've given my darling Carole a break on this issue, but she said she will try out what you recomended soon.

Q. Is it possible NOT to have duplicated assigned to cat pics show twice in Members Gallery?

Example: When viewing Henry's Gallery ...

Note that we have Members Gallery set to show users pics from all categories.
ie, none of the pics showing are specifically uploaded to Members Gallery.

Therefore, with no tech-knowledge, I have no idea whether it would be even feasible to exclude duplicate assigned to additional cat pics here.

~ Mark

Chuck S · November 26th, 2005, 08:00 AM

You would have to give an example of what you mean as it is already in the code not to show it for MEMBER'S GALLERY viewing a user's gallery in showgallery script

Code:

Content visible to verified customers only.

mjm · November 26th, 2005, 08:41 AM

I hear someone in the background saying ... You're in trouble ... he's already given us the answer!

The prev posted link shows the duplication but no changes have been implemented in this gallery yet.
Carole says she'll try it out soon.
Thanks!
~ Mark

Chuck S · November 26th, 2005, 08:46 AM

I know you are referring to a member's gallery next though

I am simply stating that code is already in showgallery script that does not show duplicates in a members gallery

mjm · November 27th, 2005, 08:04 AM

It was Carole in the background telling me I'm in trouble hehe
She replaced what you provided and it resolved the above issues.

Your a Gem Chuck, Thanks!

-----------

Edit ... there's only one place remaining with dupes ...

Using ... Recent Photos 1 day 7 days 14 days all

(We've actually scrubbed 1/7/14 days links and just have...
Most Recent > All Images)
Is it possible to not show copied dupes at ALL Images Link?

~ Mark

Carolem · May 10th, 2006, 02:57 AM

I've been trying to figure out how to get view by "All Images" to not show duplicate pics when a picture is in more than one category. I tried the fix in post 14 in this thread NOT have assigned to additional cats pics duplicated in thumb filmstrip but I still get duplicate images in view by "All Images".

I know the program has been designed this way, but it sure would be nice to have an option to not view duplicate pics.

I am still 'holding my eyelids open' hopin' for a solution...

We are using the current version protopost pro 5.3

Carolem