moderated Re: The ability to resize all uploaded Photos, or even a a single Photo #suggestion

Paul Fox

I need to report back to my group about our Photos situation.

Can I ask (and I guess this is directed directly at Mark) what the
probability is of either one of these two things happening, sometime,
say, in the next few months?
1) Some sort of online photo resizing feature is implemented, as
discussed in this thread. (Solutions involving a one-time
payment included.)
2) Basic (free) group Photo storage is (at least) doubled.

Our (Wheeler and Wilson Sewing Machines) current situation is this:
- Our group is currently over limit, and even the very cumbersome
download/re-upload trick can't be used because even after
deleting the original, the Add button is still grayed out.
- A downloaded copy of our Photo archive takes 1.2G. If I bulk
resize that collection to 1024x1024, it takes just .25G, or
20% of its former space.
- The group was formed in 2013, so it took 7 years to collect
that many photos. We could go on as normal for a very long
time if we could resize, or if storage was increased even

Our other option, of course, is to start paying. Almost more than the
cost, it's that the logistics of having to solicit the funds from the
members every year seems daunting to me. The donations feature seems
like it should help, but I'm not really interested in setting up
a back account and Swipe account. Is there a way to use the Donations
feature to have donations go directly to on behalf of a
given group's annual fee?


I wrote:
> chris jones via wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:51 PM, paul fox wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Ownership of the files would likely be lost (I assume the zip file
> > > wouldn't contain that information), but it could be probably be restored
> > > by group admins on an as-needed basis.
> >
> > And what about any additional text that might have been added for
> > various photographs? I know that many "uploaders" are lazy when it
> Good point. As it turns out that the downloaded zip file (I fetched
> one, to see what it looked like) contains a json file for each folder
> and image containing the original datestamp and description fields.
> Example:
> {"Created":"2016-01-12T20:14:10-08:00","Name":"Edge.jpg", \
> "Desc":"This View shows how the Wood is tapered for Better Fit"}
> It's not hard to imagine an import process that honored that json file.
> > comes to tidying up photographs names and adding explanatory text,
> > but those that are diligent should not have to see their efforts
> > come to nothing.
> >
> > If any change is to be requested, IMHO it ought to be resizing in situ.
> Obviously that would be optimal.
> And actually, as much as I'd love a bulk resize, I think a per-file
> button on the edit box might be better: we have photos in our
> Photos section that are scans of antique newspapers and manuals. Those
> should probably remain big, and should have gone to the Files section
> in the first place. But I'd hate to lose their detail in a bulk operation.
> paul
> =----------------------
> paul fox, (arlington, ma, where it's 77.2 degrees)

paul fox, (arlington, ma, where it's 58.8 degrees)

Join to automatically receive all group messages.