Thread

Expression engine version: 2.4.0
Editor: Wygwam

I need some assistance with a client request.  Our client would like to be able to upload multiple images at the same time when entering article text in the editor.  The multiple images should be automatically inserted into the article after uploading.

I have looked at the channel images extension but unfortunately this does not integrate with file manager (images uploaded using it do not appear in file manager) and it stores image details in it’s own table and places them in subdirectories in the images directory (one for each article).

I have considered creating this functionality but the only filemanager hook I can find is:
$edata = $this->extensions->call(‘files_after_delete’, $deleted_files);
So I am not sure if this is even possible.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Kind Regards,
Simon

Have you tried matrix and you can also use this Matrix Multi-Upload. Not sure if it is the solution your after.

Hello PVC,

Thank you for posting your question here on the ExpressionEngine forums.

Matrix, as zizther has suggested, is probably your best bet. I can also move this thread over to the Community Help Forum to check for more ideas.

Cheers,

Thanks zizther I will take a look at matrix multi upload.
Hi Shane, yes please can you move the thread to the Community Help Forum.

Hi PVC,

I would also have a look at Assets http://pixelandtonic.com/assets for managing your file uploading and management, you may find you don’t need it but it works really well with matrix (as you would expect) and it allows multiple uploads.

Thanks Gareth I will take a look at Assets.

If it’s strictly images also check out http://devot-ee.com/add-ons/channel-images

If it’s strictly images also check out http://devot-ee.com/add-ons/channel-images

I’ve lost track of the add-ons I’ve used, (at least 4 for images alone), but I have to say, as the end-user on my site, I find managing image uploads to be interminably HORRIBLE in EE.  We’re in the process of revamping our site, stem-to-stern (yes, for those of you that like to snark me, with professional EE help), and the image uploads for our FAQ articles is just horrid.  No, I’m not using Matrix (for images, although I have it for some fairly static content), which I also don’t like for any channel that has a huge number of entries.  But the whole, “can’t just FTP a folder of images into EE” thing is a pain.  Here’s how many clicks it takes me just to get to the “upload image” prompt, from within an FAQ entry (a perfectly normal EE entry): SEVEN.  Now, that’s just to upload it.  Then, if I use the Image tools, it’s another 4-5 clicks, to save the “edited” (metadata) image and “use uploaded image.”  THEN, I get to fill out the ALT data, set the size, set the borders, horiz and vert margins and then align if needed.  Now I’m up to nearly 15 or more clicks. 

But, WAIT:  if I want a lightbox effect, I get to a) go back to the image I just uploaded; select it in the entry; then click “link,” then click “browser to server,” then search for the image, by typing, then click “link,” then click done, then click “advanced,” then click inside “style,” type my lightbox style name, then click “done.”  Rinse and repeat for EVERY SINGLE IMAGE IN AN ENTRY.  Seriously?  Seriously?

Honest to crap?  It’s easier to do this in raw HTML than within EE.  Yes, I can cut down on it a BIT by FTP’ing images that I’ve pre-sized (don’t get me started about image-sizing tools in EE or EE addons), but still…it doesn’t cut down on the clicks that much, people. 

Image-handling for lots of entries is the second-worst part of EE.  EE has a lot not to recommend it to site owners—yeah, it’s all spiffy-great for you guys who develop, since you can pop them out like little cookies—but for those of us stuck using it, this type of PITA usage is a major time-consuming problem. 

I read all these pre-sales q’s, and I see how everyone always responds how “great” EE is for this, that or the next thing, but I’ll say it again—yeah, EE’s great for those of you who are developers.  For the poor business owner stuck trying to maintain it, it’s not that damn great.  I’d love to see you developers whooping up how great EE is if you had to upload hundreds upon hundreds—in my case, thousands—of images, one-by-one, entry-by-entry, or worse, pay your staff to do it, in this mind-blowingly time-consuming way.  If I’ve asked about HOW to do this faster or easier on this forum once, I’ve asked numerous times, and the blithe answer always seems to be some addon.  Well, thus far, I have yet to find ANY add-on that fixes this problem—that images only seem to ‘take’ in EE when they’re uploaded via the channel entries, instead of being able to FTP a gallery’s worth.  It’s an insane oversight in a web world that’s gone all pics and no content, IMHO.  And, no, I don’t have a gallery website—I have a NORMAL website that has thousands of images.  Nothing abnormal about it.  I’ve practically given up the idea of ever having a gallery that functions.  My latest is I have some weird “fuzziness” on all the resized images that are displayed on the site, although they are fine in the current live site.  It’s endless. 

I told my webguy to go ahead and license it (channel images) for me if it would remotely simplify my life, but thus far, I haven’t seen it show up.  We’ll see, but it would be nice if one thing about EE actually worked REMOTELY as well as the hype.

Hitch

I agree (and share) to a point with your frustration with EE’s file manager, but the alternatives suggested above really can help.

Take for example this gallery http://www.retinadance.com/gallery/la-lutte
in the backend that is 1 asset field, 1 category checkbox and 1 wysiwyg editor field, that’s all. Uploading a gallery takes a few clicks at most and inside the 1 asset field the images can be dragged and dropped in any order, deleted etc.., it also supports bulk uploading and bulk selection.
Resizing is done in the templates using ce_image, why would a client have to worry abut resizing images?
Once the setup’s done and the template coded, this client can have a new gallery up in under 2 minutes.
It really all comes down to setting things up to best serve your needs, there’s no “1 size fits all” solution.

I agree (and share) to a point with your frustration with EE’s file manager, but the alternatives suggested above really can help.

Take for example this gallery http://www.retinadance.com/gallery/la-lutte
in the backend that is 1 asset field, 1 category checkbox and 1 wysiwyg editor field, that’s all. Uploading a gallery takes a few clicks at most and inside the 1 asset field the images can be dragged and dropped in any order, deleted etc.., it also supports bulk uploading and bulk selection.
Resizing is done in the templates using ce_image, why would a client have to worry abut resizing images?
Once the setup’s done and the template coded, this client can have a new gallery up in under 2 minutes.
It really all comes down to setting things up to best serve your needs, there’s no “1 size fits all” solution.

Hi, e-man:

First, let me say, that’s a nice-looking gallery.  Nicely done, and it looks quite usable from the user’s perspective.  I have both ce_image and imgsizer, and honestly, after experiments with both over the past 4 years, I don’t remember why I’m not using one or the other—I think I’m using imgsizer now (but, as I have prof. assistance currently, I could be misspeaking). I’ve actually given up on the idea of a regular “gallery,” so my larger issue is inserting multiple-images (and, even single images) into channel posts for various aspects, whether it’s the image of the cover of a book for our books-produced pages, or an author-image on our client pages.  I’m open to suggestions for expediency.  I size the images in the upload, in, for example, my FAQ simply because not every image should be the same size, thus, there isn’t a templating one-size-fits-all solution. 

It’s not clear to me—I take it this is the channel-images addon?

Thx,
Hitch

This particular example uses Pixel and Tonic’s assets field http://pixelandtonic.com/assets

I’d also recommend checking CE image especially the bulk tag http://www.causingeffect.com/software/expressionengine/ce-image/user-guide/basics (bottom of the page) sounds like it could be useful for your particular case. Good luck!

This particular example uses Pixel and Tonic’s assets field http://pixelandtonic.com/assets

I’d also recommend checking CE image especially the bulk tag http://www.causingeffect.com/software/expressionengine/ce-image/user-guide/basics (bottom of the page) sounds like it could be useful for your particular case. Good luck!

Well, as I mentioned, we have CE images.  It feels, from your replies, that the operating assumption here is that either a) all the images will be the size that they are originally uploaded, or b) all the images will be resized on the fly in a template.  That’s great if either is the case, but what about when it’s not?  I’m building an FAQ full of fairly endless screenshots, displaying various and sundry bits of very basic “ebooks for dummies” type stuff.  The screenshots are not the same size—a Kindle screen isn’t the same size as a Nook screen, yadda-yadda.  I have to live with that.  I don’t have the luxury of using a template to resize a bunch of same-sized or nearly-same-sized images for me; hell, that’s not the problem.  If that were the case, I’d have jammed a line of code in there and been done with it using something as simple as imgsizer or what-have-you.

It’s just horribly tedious.  The alternatives seem to be to cram everything into a one-size-fits-all box, just so I don’t have to deal with the endless limitations of EE’s file-handling issues, or suffer with the endless clicks per image.  Neither, frankly, is great, and most of the addons that are so highly touted (like DevDemon) ALSO assume that every single image is uploaded via a channel entry.  It’s just…so small-time.  Like this is still Mary Sue’s Blog software. 

FWIW.

Hitch

It feels, from your replies, that the operating assumption here is that either a) all the images will be the size that they are originally uploaded, or b) all the images will be resized on the fly in a template.

You lost me here, either you leave the images alone or either you resize them - what other option is there?
Can we have a look at this faq page?

It feels, from your replies, that the operating assumption here is that either a) all the images will be the size that they are originally uploaded, or b) all the images will be resized on the fly in a template.

You lost me here, either you leave the images alone or either you resize them - what other option is there?
Can we have a look at this faq page?

I’ll PM you the page that is under development, but my entire point here, which seems to be getting lost in the shuffle, is that there is no simple or easy or not-convoluted way to size multiple images for a post at once, which, I believe, was the original complaint by the OP.  In one of your replies, you said “why would a client have to worry abut resizing images?,” to which I am replying.  As an actual end user, it is pretty obvious to me: when not all your images are the same freaking size.  And on a real, everyday website.  In fact, it seems highly likely to me that the odds are greater that not all images will be the same size, nor should be resized the same, which nukes the “image-sizing-all-done-in-the-template” approach utterly.  What I want is to find a way that doesn’t take me 7 clicks just to get to the “upload image” prompt plus the 5 extras for the meta plus the next 5-7 for the sizing.  THAT is what I’m seeking.

As I said, I’ll PM you the in-development URL.

Hitch