Yep, plus the FP album is flakey...I don't use them at all anymore.
| No problems at all. It works fine, just like the Arles solution. But it
is
| not integrated directly with FP, thus you have to apply the template
| individually to each page every time you create an album. The FP solution
| you just copy and existing gallery and choose different photos for it, and
| thus there is no need to apply the template to each page. I just wish FP
| would have more flexibility in the navigation and display of the pictures.
|
| "Rob Giordano (Crash)" wrote:
|
| > There's absolutely no issue using JAlbum with an FP web with FPSE
| > enabled...none. What problems did you have?
| >
| >
| > | > |I have checked out the Jalbum solution, and found it rather limited and
| > | difficult to integrate with FrontPage. I guess it would great if used
| > | independently or via FTP upload, rather than FrontPage Server
extensions.
| > |
| > | The great thing about the FrontPage photogallery is the one source
| > solution,
| > | but I dislike the limited choices of templates, no slide show, and the
| > arrows
| > | for navegation often are not visible to the user. Then, if vertical
or
| > | horizontal templates are used, when the user clicks on the thumbnail
is
| > taken
| > | to a larger picture with no return or next link.
| > |
| > | I will tray the Arles solution as it seems more flexible, specially
since
| > | what I want to do is maintain my own template look and feel
throughtout
| > the
| > | photo gallery.
| > |
| > | "Dean Collins" <collins_dean"spam-me-here" wrote:
| > |
| > | > yep I use jalbum as well check out
| > | >
http://www.collins.net.pr/Photo/index.html
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | > | > > It's time to switch to a better program!
| > | > > Especially JAlbum:
| > | > >
http://www.eleanorstravels.com/PhotoGalleryPrograms/index.htm
| > | > > Eleanor
| > | > > | > | > >> Thanks Ron - you are right, i should try it in the real world.
| > | > >> Do you have any comment regarding FP photo gallery versus say,
Arles?
| > | > >> I am interested as I have heard that there are compatibility
problems
| > | > >> with
| > | > >> FP Photo gallery. Mind you, at my stage of developement they
could
| > tell
| > | > >> me
| > | > >> the sky was green!!!
| > | > >> many thanks,
| > | > >> --
| > | > >> peebs
| > | > >>
| > | > >>
| > | > >> "Ronx" wrote:
| > | > >>
| > | > >>> 10 pictures at 6K each would take about 20 seconds to download,
with
| > the
| > | > >>> rest of the page that adds to about 30 seconds; aA bit long for
a
| > home
| > | > >>> page,
| > | > >>> but acceptable for a photogallery - if the user knows it is a
| > | > >>> photogallery,
| > | > >>> and there is nothing else on the page such as graphical
navigation
| > bars.
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> The estimates given by FrontPage reports can be very inaccurate,
| > | > >>> particularly if there are many external components (images,
include
| > | > >>> pages)
| > | > >>> in the page - best way to see is to try it in real life.
| > | > >>> --
| > | > >>> Ron Symonds - Microsoft MVP (FrontPage)
| > | > >>> Reply only to group - emails will be deleted unread.
| > | > >>> FrontPage Support:
http://www.frontpagemvps.com/
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>> | > | > >>> > I am new to FP so please bear with me.
| > | > >>> > I have constructed a page using the FP photo gallery. It works
| > fine
| > | > >>> > but
| > | > >>> when
| > | > >>> > i look in the site report I get 2 problems. Firstly under slow
| > pages i
| > | > >>> > see
| > | > >>> > some pages called real.htm & real_p.htm. What are these pages?
| > | > >>> > Secondly,
| > | > >>> > these pages and the photogallery page that I created are shown
as
| > | > >>> > having
| > | > >>> huge
| > | > >>> > download times - like 500+ secs at 56k!!
| > | > >>> > I haven't published yet to actually see it on the web but is
this
| > | > >>> > typical
| > | > >>> of
| > | > >>> > FP photo Gallery? Would a third party package like Arles be a
| > better
| > | > >>> choice?
| > | > >>> > I might add that I have only put 10 photos in the gallery.
They
| > are
| > | > >>> > .JPG
| > | > >>> and
| > | > >>> > have been compressed to around 6kb each.
| > | > >>> > Any help greatly appreciated.
| > | > >>> > Thanks,
| > | > >>> > --
| > | > >>> > peebs
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>>
| > | > >>>
| > | > >
| > | > >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| >
| >
| >
