So How Does This Happen?

I think I have just figured why I used to sell these two images all the time and then all of sudden there has not been a sale for either of them for quite some time. :-(

i will say its that 1 at the end. because that's how the site divides things. and you have two that have the same name. if the 1 was a 2, then i think it would be unique. but it should be a unique name.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Maybe, the id is the same because the number, like punctuation id being stripped ? Wild guess/. The id should be like a unique serial number and not based on the title. Can't be sure.

If there's a bug, seems a new one.

Perhaps something like this in SQL :

Select from products where author=x and product-type=y and title=z

The title=z is wrong and should be productid=z

Wild guess but something like that would explain it.

Mike, doesn't the number 1 at the end make it unique enough?

I have several dozen images with the same title but with a 1 behind and it and this is the first time I have seen this.

I have accidentally uploaded images with the exact same title.

That takes forever to get fixed. I had to delete the images, wait two weeks and upload the images with total different titles.

Yeah, a 1 at the end certainly makes it a unique filename. Dupes append a number to the front of the filename and should be irrelevant anyway if the two original file names were different.

you would think, but everything on this site that has a double puts a -1 -2 etc in the url file name, so maybe its confused?

i'd try changing it totally, like flute player - Sepia, that way it describes it and its totally different.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

I would hope not since it also appends the artist's name and the dupes get numbers appended to the front of the filename (1-)(2-). Who knows what happened, evidently something did though.

maybe the system ignores numbers? like the number isn't unique enough, if the rest of the title is the same?

----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

I've seen several people using numbers at the end of otherwise identical filenames that are a series. Blah-blah-blah-1, Blah-blah-blah-2 etc.

its the only logical conclusion. i never really got why we have that issue in the first place. the system looks at the name then assigns a number. maybe the system is more confused than before, there are a bunch of other bugs. maybe this is an easter egg.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Yeah, seems like a DB ID bug or glitch or whatever.

The crazy thing is those images have been up there for over five years and have sold multiple times each in the first couple of years. Not sure when the last one was. I bet it was when the cross pollution started.

i do wonder how many other images are like that. i've found a few that were totally broken. i had to put it back. i found one the other day that had no image, but the the description, title etc of another image. came across that one in the contests. but its impossible to check them all.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Mike, I think one title cannot be exactly contained in another.... i.e. At the Seashore and At the Seashore 1. The title "At the Seashore" is wholly contained in At the Seashore 1, but not vice versa. A "2" should be added to At the Seashore, then it will not be wholly contained in At the Seashore 1 . Clear as mud? :) lol

I think they did something to the code, because this was allowed before.

Nah, I just tried it. blah blah and blah blah 1 and both are for sale.

its not that they can't be both for sale, the icons mix. if you look on the right on that link he has there, you can see the other one in its place. its acting like the same title was used.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

I didn't see any mixup...I'll try again.

Just uploaded a black and white and then a color. Tester and Tester 1 and both have the proper images on the proper products showing.

i wonder if you see the mix up at a cache level?

i clicked on the poster

https://fasgallerycom.pixels.com/featured/kokopelli-the-flute-player-1-barbara-snyder.html?product=canvas-print

and the main image is right, but the drop down was beige and the sample on the above link on the right is beige.


----Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Guys,

Older code constantly in use gets constantly rewritten, tampered with. In the industry the code then becomes known as 'brittle'

I was looking at my AW two minutes ago. I was rearranging my galleries on Pixels. I clicked on a collection thumbnail and was told I do not have access to these files. That was very temporary, but hey.

Dave

It has to be a something on FAA's end because we see the same snafu with fresh caches.

Dave, I get that more than frequently when rearranging or selecting a collection thumb and then trying to click directly on another collection. Click to images and then back to collections and all is well, and it happens on FAA.

The DB had better not be brittle with image ID's... That's called a mess. ;-)

I don't use numbers for images in a series. I'll use I, II, II, IV, etc and have yet to have an issue. Yet.

This has always been an issue and is why you have to be careful never to use the same title more than once, although I would have thought adding "1" or "2" on upload would make it unique, so who knows?

To be honest, I have never understood why the image title is used in the URL at all, it would be so much cleaner if it was just the unique image reference number from the database, but 'twas ever thus...

~Richard
http://www.reevephotos.com

Just yesterday I uploaded a series...Lava Flow 1, 2, 3, 4,

And in December I added Monstera Tropical Leaves 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

They all look okay, I wonder if I am heading for future trouble??

I would rather not name them differently because I want shoppers to see there is a series of them.

That is quite a mess with the Flute Player Floyd.

If I was a shopper, I wouldn't know which one would be sent to me.

If I really wanted to buy one I would contact you or FAA. If I sort of wanted one, I'd move on.

Hope it gets fixed or you change names and start from scratch. They are both very nice!

What is really disturbing about it is the fact that I have literally hundreds of images and thousands of links out there on the net.

Six years of doing titles that way and just now finding this problem.

Floyd,

Last I read, Sean was working to make the site better on cell phones. He has to do that. Better now than at Christmas time.

Plus in the past Sean worked more at night in the wee hours.

Dave

I just checked some of the other titles where I used the 1 on the end of the same title and there does not seem to be any problems...

This is just strange. I deleted the image and uploaded it again through the edit feature and it seems to have it right now. The other strange thing was that the only place it had the right image showing was in the thumbnail where it says, Wall Art.

Carlin, you're ok, because each title is not completely contained in another. You don't have any without a number tacked on the end.... that is the key. Seems we can't have a title in a series that has no number.

Joy, you just may have hit the nail right on the head. I have little or no understanding of the techy stuff.

It may be just a matter of time for the second shoe to fall on the other titles with the 1 being the only difference. So far they are all working just fine, knock on wood.

And I also think David B may be correct that Sean is tweaking the site and that may have been the cause for the glitch and there is more to come!!

Thanks Joy. I recently uploaded an image without a number, not realizing I wanted to do a series. Easy enough now to add a 1 to the name before I upload 2,3,4.

Floyd, Joy, Carlin...

See above. I tried that twice last night with 5 images and it worked fine for me.

"Just uploaded a black and white and then a color. Tester and Tester 1 and both have the proper images on the proper products showing."

I tried it twice and saw no issues either time. No reason for them to break in the future unless the site is having issues.

Richard,

I would much rather have recognizable words in the page url..it is much more memorable than a long series of numbers/letters.

Plus...

“I believe that is a very small ranking factor.” John Mueller, Google 2016

However small...small is better than zero if it's still the case.

A few reasons to not use an ugly image ID.

"URLs are a minor ranking factor search engines use when determining a particular page or resource's relevance to a search query. While they do give weight to the authority of the overall domain itself, keyword use in a URL can also act as a ranking factor."

https://moz.com/learn/seo/url

Where do you think the link you posted is supposed to lead me? All I see is a list of profile images for all the artists in my state.

It looks like he has pulled it down or changed the title.