Manufacturer image directory

[DrByte]

For products, the "small" images go in the /images dir. Only the med/large go into subdirs.

For manufacturers there are no multiple-size images, so no added subdirs either

[plc613]

For products, the "small" images go in the /images dir. Only the med/large go into subdirs.

For manufacturers there are no multiple-size images, so no added subdirs either

Yeah I know but did you read the whole thread? I followed the instructions and created a images/small which I really like because it feels cleaner but if it's going to be a "hack" to get working I'll revert back to the standard.

[DrByte]

I had read most of the whole thread, but didn't realize you'd switched topics mid-way, and somehow I missed some posts.

There are lots of places where the small product images are used exactly as they are specified in the database, ie: for the "small" images. It's only where med/large images are intended to be used that there is special logic to look for the alternate sizes.

That's a complicated lot of code to adjust.

I suppose one way you could try is change the path for all product/cat images in the db, and then where med/large are used add an extra step to strip out the small/ string before attempting to do pattern matching for med/large.

[plc613]

I had read most of the whole thread, but didn't realize you'd switched topics mid-way, and somehow I missed some posts.

There are lots of places where the small product images are used exactly as they are specified in the database, ie: for the "small" images. It's only where med/large images are intended to be used that there is special logic to look for the alternate sizes.

That's a complicated lot of code to adjust.

I suppose one way you could try is change the path for all product/cat images in the db, and then where med/large are used add an extra step to strip out the small/ string before attempting to do pattern matching for med/large.

Yes. To be clear I was pointing it out for any other reason than as you mentioned I added a slightly related topic.

So based on your assessment, I would say that for me personally it is not worth the mere benefit of achieving a "clean" look. I think I'll pull out of that before I go any further since all I need to do is undo a simple db edit for that folder.

I would point out as I mentioned initially when explaining why I asked this in the first place; if you read the document explaining how to prep images near the end if you follow the explanation explicitly you would end up uploading your small images in a subfolder called small under images. It's fine by me but someone new coming along might interpret it in the same way I did.

[plc613]

Okay, executed:

UPDATE products
SET products_image = REPLACE(products_image, 'small/', '')

to strip the folder name and now small, medium and large seem to be all back to normal. (after moving the from small/ to /images via ftp of course)

[DrByte]

I would point out as I mentioned initially when explaining why I asked this in the first place; if you read the document explaining how to prep images near the end if you follow the explanation explicitly you would end up uploading your small images in a subfolder called small under images.

Thanks. Link updated to point to the docs site, which doesn't mention a "small" subdir.

[plc613]

Thanks. Link updated to point to the docs site, which doesn't mention a "small" subdir.

Yes it does.

12 Create another folder called small. Copy all the images from large to it.
13 Run a batch-process on the files in small to resize to 125 pixels square; you may as well optimize for web as well.
14 Upload them all to images.

This tells me that the subfolder 'small' gets uploaded to the /images directory as in images/small. Since you presume the images you put in ../large and ../medium must stay in their respected folders as they do, you'd have to explicitly state "now remove the images from the 'small' folder you created so and upload all the images to the images folder.
Again, doesn't really matter to me since I know the difference. I was just trying to do it because I actually prefer the feel of more folders=more organized but as mentioned, not at the cost of breaking everything and hacked away at the stock code. I was okay with a simple SQL code change but nothing more. imo it could definitely be written with more explicit intention.

[DrByte]

Thanks. Will make a note to do some more updates to it!