Well, thing is that I can't accept some suggestions just like take a glass or water. Somethings involves planning and perhaps you don't notice and that may be annoying for you.
First of all I accept the idea of having custom virtual folders just like you have suggested. I have also added just for you the tumblr thing and the twitter via that you ask for and I start the idea of having a short url module. So may I ask you what is the problem? Some features can be implemented, other could be implemented and other are just bad ideas.
The discussion of the filenames with the argue of short url is pointless because in 2.1 the images will have datefolders meaning that the direct image url will be huge and since the storage will be different each day there is no need of complex random image names. The only thing that matters here is what is more comfortable for the end user.
By the way if you want to track image views you should really think about use more the viewer because is the cheapest way of tracking the image views. Of course you can set a server log module that will track all the request and then dispatch info to PHP to keep things up to date but I don't believe that many users here will want to do that job in their machines. You can also serve the images using PHP but that will need real servers and not all the clients here want that.
You have to understand that this is not a script just for you: Is for more people. You have payed 30 USD and you almost want custom coding and all your suggestion filled no mather they only works for you? It will never happen.
First of all I accept the idea of having custom virtual folders just like you have suggested. I have also added just for you the tumblr thing and the twitter via that you ask for and I start the idea of having a short url module. So may I ask you what is the problem? Some features can be implemented, other could be implemented and other are just bad ideas.
The discussion of the filenames with the argue of short url is pointless because in 2.1 the images will have datefolders meaning that the direct image url will be huge and since the storage will be different each day there is no need of complex random image names. The only thing that matters here is what is more comfortable for the end user.
By the way if you want to track image views you should really think about use more the viewer because is the cheapest way of tracking the image views. Of course you can set a server log module that will track all the request and then dispatch info to PHP to keep things up to date but I don't believe that many users here will want to do that job in their machines. You can also serve the images using PHP but that will need real servers and not all the clients here want that.
You have to understand that this is not a script just for you: Is for more people. You have payed 30 USD and you almost want custom coding and all your suggestion filled no mather they only works for you? It will never happen.
