Image Renaming Options

[yavuz]

Currently the system renames files with a random string. This is usually good and keeps the links nice and short. However, the more I use my beta site and get feedback from uploaders, the more I miss the original filename in the link present.

Maybe it's a habbit thing I don't know. It helps track images expecially when uploaded in bulk. My humble suggestion would be like in this example below:

The file is called batman.png

Original
http://sitename.com/images/G9AVx.png
With File Name
http://sitename.com/images/G9AVx/batman.png
or
http://sitename.com/images/G9AVx_batman.png
or
http://sitename.com/images/batman_G9AVx.png

Maybe this could be achieved via a .htaccess code if not it would - in my opinion - a very nice option for admins that would like to have the original filename present.

 

[Rodolfo]

The filenames are random just because one little concern: Privacy.

If we use the original filename and you upload pictures taken with your digital camera someone can easily see more images by just adding +1 to the filename. That's why the filenames are complete random so no one can guess the image urls. It also avoids content scrapping because if the files gets consecutive names someone can fetch all your files and steal your images.

I know that it must be annoying to loose some filenames because of that. In 1.X we use to name the pictures with a mixture of the original filename and the random name, something like batm93e.jpg but it was dropped.

But I think that you have a point here. This should be improved.

 

[Piers]

The filenames are random just because one little concern: Privacy.

If we use the original filename and you upload pictures taken with your digital camera someone can easily see more images by just adding +1 to the filename. That's why the filenames are complete random so no one can guess the image urls. It also avoids content scrapping because if the files gets consecutive names someone can fetch all your files and steal your images.

I know that it must be annoying to loose some filenames because of that. In 1.X we use to name the pictures with a mixture of the original filename and the random name, something like batm93e.jpg but it was dropped.

But I think that you have a point here. This should be improved.

Maybe an option when uploading [ ] Keep Filename [x] Random filename

 

[Rodolfo]

what about back to the old renaming option? It keeps part of the filename and avoids scrapping.

 

[Piers]

back to the old renaming option

+1

Maybe in future versions giving the admin an option to choose between the renaming methods, but for the 2.1 release that seems the best option.

 

[kyle789]

what about back to the old renaming option? It keeps part of the filename and avoids scrapping.

The current file name system is perfect. Please don't take Chevereto a step back.

I think it's important to remember most people will share that file link... the short URL is the standard now.

 

[rain]

Ditto.

 

[Piers]

The new direct file link on 2.1 is much longer due to the folders, so for example

http://domainname.com/images/2012/05/07/12ABC.jpg

So it's not really going to make much difference if it is

http://domainname.com/images/2012/05/07/Mountain-1X.jpg

instead.

Just my 2 cents

 

[yavuz]

what about back to the old renaming option? It keeps part of the filename and avoids scrapping.

I haven't thought about the privacy matter and when I think of it now that is something that concerns me too.

What you have suggested Rodolfo is a good solution. Scramble the filename a bit but just enough that the user knows which image that is. imageshack does that and that sounds also good. I can work with that

 

[kyle789]

All I know is the shorter the better.

 

[Rodolfo]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

 

[kyle789]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

But more people share the file link than the viewer.

 

[yavuz]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

But more people share the file link than the viewer.

I must add that I like links short too. If people prefer that way, why not give them the option?

 

[Rodolfo]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

But more people share the file link than the viewer.

ok got your point stop flooding with it. if you really like it that short you can tune the code and make urls 1 char shorter by changing the protocol to ftp:// instead of http:// is that ok or you want shorter link? What about a single letter domain... that willl also help.

 

[Piers]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

But more people share the file link than the viewer.

ok got your point stop flooding with it. if you really like it that short you can tune the code and make urls 1 char shorter by changing the protocol to ftp:// instead of http:// is that ok or you want shorter link? What about a single letter domain... that willl also help.

lol

 

[kyle789]

All I know is the shorter the better.

We are talking about the image url not the image viewer. You have enough shortness in the viewer.

But more people share the file link than the viewer.

ok got your point stop flooding with it. if you really like it that short you can tune the code and make urls 1 char shorter by changing the protocol to ftp:// instead of http:// is that ok or you want shorter link? What about a single letter domain... that willl also help.

Yeah OK cheers.

You're the one taking this script a step back.... you pick up on stupid things like IP logs and file names yet simple things like a view counter are nowhere to be seen.

 

[Rodolfo]

ip logs is required because you need to know who is the pervert who uploads child porn pics or things like that so you can ban him or his proxy. You can also share this ip with your local police so in case that people find this pics they won't blame you for hidding uploader's info.

If you really want to argue here start by using solid arguments and not things that a 4th grader will shout.

 

[kyle789]

My point is, you pick up on things that are not necessary whilst things that are the standard you don't even mention.

You're calling me childish but YOU are the one giving rude and sarcastic replies to a CUSTOMER!

Thanks Rodolfo! Good to know the level of respect you place on people with feedback.

 

[Rodolfo]

I was the 3rd or 4th response where you only keep saying the same thing. If I dont pick some suggestions is because there are more things way more important at this time. I have already told you before in other topic that the best is make a sort url module but you keep asking over and over the subject. I really dont understand what else you want.

 

[kyle789]

I was the 3rd or 4th response where you only keep saying the same thing. If I dont pick some suggestions is because there are more things way more important at this time. I have already told you before in other topic that the best is make a sort url module but you keep asking over and over the subject. I really dont understand what else you want.

Posting on this forum is turning into an ordeal. If you don't want our input delete the suggestion topic.

I just wanted to know that you get it and are keeping it in mind OR that you don't get it and you don't intend on keeping things short.

That's it.