sgluskin

Thank you. That is exactly what I needed.

shai

Thanks for finding that vkaryl. That one doesn’t have a photo upload — which is a core need.

Shai

Thermoptic,

Great that you tried this. I haven’t gotten the chance yet. Questions that come up are:

Did you check to see the pixel size of the thumbnail file?

Also, the problem you describe is no different than the problem that currently exists if you choose “original” file size. The display html has it set to 128 by 96 but you can size it up in the html without any loss of quality to the actual “original” size of the upload. That is a bug, I’m sure they’ll get that part right in a future update.

Shai

LIvia, I got a reply when I posted this later.

Shai

Hi Joel Walsh,

You didn’t put the code in your post to this thread correctly so it is hard to inspect for errors because WordPress might have changed it. You need to surround your code in backticks when you share it here. The backtick is usually on the same key as a tilda ~. On my keyboard it is just above the tab key. Here is what a backtick looks like: `

Shai

I just installed the “ImageManager” plug-in. It is okay, but there should still be a simpler solution. Read about it and download it. The resizing only happens after it has uploaded the original pick to the server. So you then have to delete the old big version after you have resized it and saved to a new file.

My next idea is that I’d be happy with the built-in to 2.0 Image Browsers’ thumbnail making capability if I could just make those thumbs bigger, like to 320 X 240. So maybe there is a parameter that just needs to be changed there regarding the size of the thumbnail created.

Shai

dearteco,

Resize the image in an image editor (Photoshop Elements, iPhoto on a Mac — there should be at least one that came free with your computer).

Then when you upload the image using the “original” — the original is small enough so it won’t slow down your site. If you uploaded that was 320 X 240, it will be reduced automatically to 120 X 90 or some such. But as long as you chose “use original”, the image itself is still 320 X 240. Then you can use those handles and stretch the picture up to 320 X 240 and not have to worry about any image quality reduction.

No question this is all awkward now in WP and I’m sure it will get worked out. But the key to what I’ve wirtten above is to reduce the image size in a program before uploadingn to WordPress.

Shai

outbound, I’m sure the situation will get better with time. But my feeling about computers, Internet etc. is that nothing works perfectly. You have to have a bunch of tools ready. Yeah, so you browse by default in Safari — and when that doesn’t work for what you need, you use a different tool — occasionally that even means, ouch, using a PC — but that doesn’t make me angry or want to junk my PC or scream at the PC dominated world, I just move on realizing that there are a lot of PCs around and when Ineed to use one, it isn’t too hard to find.

And like I said before, Firefox for Mac does fine with the WYSIWYG editor for WordPress.

I’m not sure I understand the question.

in wp-content/themes/default/sidebar.php you can customize the sidebar to your heart’s content. Is that what you were looking for?

It is a good idea to make a copy of sidebar.php before you mess with it in case your changes cause something not to work.

Shai

Yes, yes! My kids (elementary school age) are getting very handy with using our new “dogblog” — but I do the photo uploading for now. I’m concerned that there are too many steps in the workflow to have them do it. And I’d love for them to be independant with this.

Add me to the group of people waiting for Kafkaesqui’s getImage() function.

Shai

I don’t get how this is different than what is built-in to WordPress. You upload a pic and then put the url of it in your post. Whether that post appears on the blogs home page or in the archives, the image goes with it.

I’m obviously missing something. Please share…

Thanks Kafkaesqui. Worked like a charm. For others following this thread who want a little more handholding…

The file I changed was:

wp-content/themes/default/sidebar.php

At line 51 replace:

<?php wp_list_cats('sort_column=name&optioncount=1&hierarchical=0'); ?>

with

<?php wp_list_cats('sort_column=name&optioncount=1&hierarchical=0&hide_empty=0'); ?>

Then you are good to go.

Shai

Safari and Omniweb don’t support it. End of matter. (I think that editor is called something like tinymce.)

I’m not sure what the Safari/Omniweb developers are thinking in regard to future support for such. But for now it isn’t there.

On a Mac particularly you have to have several browsers available at your fingertips. Safari looks MUCH better than Firefox IMHO, but I have Firefox ready at the mouse if I want a WYSIWIG editor for writing WordPress posts.

Shai

I’ve been using Site Ground for a couple months. I have a WP blog there. They have the “Fantastico” installer via “C-panel” and it has worked great for me. The site seems fast to view, although I’ve found posting articles and comments to be slow. The admin page also is slow.

Their online ticket system is great; you get a response within ten minutes. I’ve been meaning to ask them about the WP being slow.

Shai