Why can't photos be attached rather than using the gallery?

[olivia_jason]

may i ask why we cant attach Photo's via the "attachments and other options settings"? its obviously been disabled but wondering why the gallery is used instead? i was using photo bucket thinking it must have been done for saving of Forum Data allowance but the gallery thingo suggests thats not the case.

[Newie]

Hi OJ, I've moved your question into it's own thread as it's something that a few people are unclear on.

I'll leave it to someone who knows more about the technical details to answer it though 


Newie

[olivia_jason]

yer no worry's mate cheers.
was wondering because it would be allot easier for our threads, and smf has this feature as default.

[Terry]

Hi,

this was asked/suggested in the "have your say" thread last week or so, but as yet we haven't responded to it.

The short answer is that using Attachments for images restricts the use of that image to just that post/thread, stores all attachments in one big folder on the server and doesn't allow much if anything in the way of searching and tagging of images so for these reason I buy the Gallery Software each year or two and have a lot more management and viewing options for the images people choose to place in it.

Terry

Ps. Not as relevant these days with the tighter control to keep out Spammer/Malware, but there is a security risk with using attachments for passing on virus and malware. 

[olivia_jason]

is this something we can have changed? there are also thread image taggin options also for smf now. if anything the images would be more relevant in their threads with the posts. the other option could be, is not allowing people to attach files till they reach a certain post count,prety certain Smf allows that, i know at one point that couldnt happen but they followed Vbulletin and allowed that sort of feature i am pretty sure.  to avoid spammers posting garbage. thats just an idea anyways im throwing around,  cheers

ps i would have posted this on the have your say section, however that was before i knew you could upload into gallery as image host, i assumed originally we couldnt upload images for the sake of saving data allowance which was reasonable.

[Terry]

ps i would have posted this on the have your say section, however that was before i knew you could upload into gallery as image host, i assumed originally we couldnt upload images for the sake of saving data allowance which was reasonable.

That is a different problem I have to workout. , but a few years ago when i turned it off one aspect was the lack of controls available and it very quickly started filling up when only a few people were using it.

Terry

[olivia_jason]

That is a different problem I have to workout. , but a few years ago when i turned it off one aspect was the lack of controls available and it very quickly started filling up when only a few people were using it.

Terry

yer its all fun and games trying to strike that balance, you certainly wouldn't want to allow 10mg images at a time. lol, might be a case of restricting image files to well under a meg, which is good enough really and, helps with page load speed and the server load.

anyways i virtually only asking for the sake of easier image load, at the end of the day thats upto you guys as you guys are the ones having to do the hard work with site organization, which us members are thankfull for. cheers