Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
elrojo14

No More Background Image URL Option

Recommended Posts

I am sure the new change to easily upload a background image into a new cache listing is for those that do not have most of our advanced skills. And I actually don't mind it that much. However, where I used to be able to input the link and could use hosting from anywhere or even from pre-existing caches or events, I now have to upload the image again. I would imagine this would suck up a lot of storage space. After my CITO event publishes I will see if I can go edit it again like I used to. If not, is it possible to have the new feature and still have the old input for the URL too? Thank you. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Here's an image of what the background image upload looks like now.  It won't accept the URL of an existing uploaded image. On the other hand, it's not putting the image used through the peculiar munging of cache owner gallery images. 

 

 

background image no more take URL.jpg

  • Helpful 3

Share this post


Link to post

I ought to have mentioned that there's a Release Notes thread for this,  @elrojo14

You might want read it, upvote a post, or post something there

 

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

First the 'related website' option and now the the background image.

Wonder if someone actually asked for this 'improvement'...

Edited by JeLiHeWi
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/17/2020 at 5:56 AM, JeLiHeWi said:

First the 'related website' option and now the the background image.

Wonder if someone actually asked for this 'improvement'...

I just planted a cache using it and it is not optimal. It wouldn't accept my .jpg so I had to convert it to a .png. Then it was too big so I had to downsize it. I don't really like it at all. Also, I liked uploading the photo and then pasting the URL there because people could still click on the photo and see it in its entirety if they didn't like the tile or too big affect behind the cache page. Yeah I am not a fan. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, just stumbled on this on the submission page.

Adding an option for drag and drop is one thing but effectively outlawing the use of a pre-prepared URL without warning is a veritable nightmare if one has puzzles to maintain. I guess I'll be reading that Release Notes thread extremely carefully before considering editing any puzzle...

 

EDIT: My potentially vulnerable puzzles do all seem to be functional at first glance. Long term implications still scare me....

 

Edited by BendSinister
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, BendSinister said:

Long term implications still scare me....

 

The fact that a couple of changes here were made without warning to cache owners - since the changes directly altered listing display as well as properties - are the primary concern, yeah. Announcements were made after the fact, but nothing detailed, a very simplistic explanation, and it had to be discovered by the community initially.  For one, that's a PR problem when something breaks with an update and your customers find out for themselves first.  But the fact that once again it's a change that affects desktop use alone (the proxying of images at least) and feels relegated to "unimportant" enough not to disclose before being discovered is much more irksome, IMO.  And apart from fixing the occasional error as only explicitly reported, there seems to be no other indication that the problem is heard, let alone understood, as it's gone entirely unaddressed apart from that. :(

  • Upvote 4
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

The thing that puzzles me now is the different treatment of the background image vs images embedded via HTML in the cache description. Particularly with regard to the stripping of EXIF data.

 

For the sake of clarity I tested how things stand a few weeks on with a new cache submission:

- EXIF is intact with a manually-embedded-in-description-HTML image.
- EXIF is stripped when the very same image is dragged-and-dropped to become the background image.

Are background images inherently more problematic security-wise? Otherwise why bother scrubbing EXIF at all if it's inconsistently applied? (I can understand it in logs, where images are posted daily with gay abandon. But surely the CO should be allowed to continue making the choice for themselves upon setting up/adjusting a cache.)

 

The more I think about this the more angry I get that I'll need to archive at least one cache with a grandfathered background image if I ever need to move the container more than a few feet.

 

 

Edited by BendSinister

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, BendSinister said:

The more I think about this the more angry I get that I'll need to archive at least one cache with a grandfathered background image if I ever need to move the container more than a few feet.


I don’t think this is the case.  As I understand it, if you remove a background image URL, you won’t be able to put it back, but it won’t be removed automatically when you make a change to the listing.

Share this post


Link to post

Understood, but before last month I would have re-uploaded the image with new meta-data to reflect such a location change. Coordinates are not explicitly laid out there, but that's the only point in the puzzle itself that I'd have altered if I needed to move the cache 3 metres eastwards or whatever.

(I'm not prevented from introducing messy workarounds like an offset after the puzzle is solved, admittedly, but if I knew that this is what lay barely a year into the future I would never have published.)

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, BendSinister said:

Understood, but before last month I would have re-uploaded the image with new meta-data to reflect such a location change.


Got you.  What a pain!  ☹️

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, uploading an image to their server will strip exif data. Their proxy server doesn't strip exif data. It's an inconsistency. At the very least, there could be option on uploading an image to override and allow exif data if desired.

 

And yes, much like the related url field, the background url value was grandfathered, but in this case it can't be edited, and the url is removed by uploading an image for the background.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×
×
  • Create New...