In my endeavor to convert a photo slideshow from one site to another I ran into a dilemma.
What is the best practice for slideshow delivery?
I ask this because it was drilled into us (students) about being web tidy, best practices, contributing to make the web and servers as green as possible. Not to mention shooting for an ultra-light site for fast delivery and higher possible rankings on search engines.
The two contenders (maybe more?) are:
1) Using one or more of the modules in Drupal (which is best, fastest and easiest to implement and for client side updating)?
OR
2) Using Sony Vegas Movie Studio Platinum and creating a MPG video of a slideshow?
As of this posting, Sony Vegas is much faster to create, less involvement and I know it far better than Views, Views Slideshow.
I realize regarding client side, something like CCK-Views would be easier to update but am also concerned about load times and end user delivery.
Then if Sony wins, best hosted on one's own site or embedded via a service/site such as Youtube? With Youtube one has the video doing double duty in being picked up by both search engines globally and on Youtube searches.
Comments
An eternal question...
Great questions, Christopher. The photo slideshow and photo gallery are things which I end up setting up fairly often. First, to address your contenders...
Let's address it more generally. The main options for presenting a photo slideshow online are (in no particular order):
In practice, there are a few more options (embedded PDF slideshows), but those typically include Flash, so I'll include that with #1 above.
Flash
From a performance, usability, and accessibility standpoint, I'm opposed to using Adobe Flash to present a slideshow (and/or an embedded video slideshow). I won't go off on a rant, but I'll say that I try to avoid it whenever necessary. That being said, Flash slideshows are the easiest to create and include in a site with little or no programming knowledge. There are countless online tools and software plugins which allow a person to create their slideshow. Just Google Flash slideshow for some options. SlideShowPro has been a popular choice.
Video
If you choose to go the movie/video route, I'd encourage you to learn how to implement the HTML5
<video>tag with a fallback to Flash. Check out http://diveintohtml5.org/video.html for a great intro!JavaScript
From an SEO, usability, and accessibility standpoint, I feel like the HTML/CSS/JS route is the most responsible choice. (That's an opinion, by the way. You'll find LOTS of people who disagree with me!)
To create an image slideshow in Drupal without video or Flash, you'll need (at a minimum - following my method):
I've been trying to refine a photo gallery method over the past few weeks/months. Check out this in-progress staging site for client's site I'm working on (That link may go away at any time, by the way. If you're reading this and the link is gone, let me know, and I'll point you in the right direction.) Go to one of the "Portfolios" to see one version of a slideshow. No Flash. No video. Just HTML, CSS, and JS. Plus, I didn't write any of the JS. It's all part of the Views Slideshow module.
I've put this together as a Feature. (For more information, check out the Features module.) It's my first Feature and has lots of dependencies, but I'd be happy for you (or anyone else) to give it a try. It's available for direct download at http://scottrousedigital.com/deluxe_image_gallery-6.x-1.0.tar, but the best way to use it and to help me out is to branch it at GitHub and help me refine it.
It's pretty shy on the documentation right now (meaning…none), so I wouldn't go implementing it on any live sites without testing. Best of luck!
Lullabot has a helpful video tutorial about creating Photo galleries with Views Attach. I'd recommend spending the 16 1/2 minutes it takes to watch it. It's not a slideshow, but you can use the method for any View (including a Slideshow).
Scott Rouse
http://about.me/scott.rouse
SlideShow Pro Director and HTML5
I'm definitely not doing any developing of my own, but did just want to chime in that SlideShowPro Director now has backup HTML5 slideshows for mobile devices, including iPads.
(http://slideshowpro.net/products/slideshowpro_director/)
It's also on special for $39 until Oct. 1. I've used SlideShowPro quite a few times and it's really easy and flexible. I like looking at their monthly user examples for ideas. It's not the only option out there, but it has been a really easy one for me, and one I hope to use more in the upcoming months on some of my personal projects.
Thanks
Thanks for the info about SlideShow Pro's HTML5 work. That looks very promising.
-Scott
Scott Rouse
http://about.me/scott.rouse
SSD ProD is slick
I have used it once. As a 'newb' the instruction videos were easy to follow with minor goofs on my part. The client really liked the fairly simple GUI to add photos, create Galleries and Albums.
I didn't like (at that time) the inability to easily segregate albums to port to different pages if desired or I didn't understand how.
As well, as Scott pointed out once or twice, it then was a deterrent to Google, tags (for external searches-search engines) and that was/is a no-no.
Additionally the .swf's have to be created each time if the client wanted a different render on each page or whatever.
Other than that I really liked it.
Yeah but...
...I didn't clearly communicate, apologies.
I have been watching googled videos on setting up slideshows (photo, mind you) in Drupal with all the modules you mentioned. I am missing something somewhere. Sadly I can't tell you what. Once I see it in action I can get it then (of course) I could tell you the issue(s).
What I was asking is which is better overall, embedding a YT video/slideshow or having it (Views, etc.) handled on-site.
I sheepishly was hoping the answer was/is video due to the impending headache I am due for banging my head against CCK-Views-Imagefield, etc.
Now to reply to your reply:
Yes, I agree with avoiding SWF's at this time-SEO wise, et al. I have used (as you know) SSD Pro and after hearing your initial arguments/points about using it (a few months back) I started looking at Drupal's modules. Plus using Views (et al) can make it easier for clients to manage content faster than having to create videos, by far.
Thanks for the link to Lullabot's screen cast. That answers another unasked question.
I appreciate your detailed reply and always your purist viewpoint as it really keeps me on my toes! Thanks Scott.
So I see (while writing this) that it's time to grab some aspirin, be a big boy and plunge headlong into CCK-Views and all the mentioned modules.
I was able to follow the link (thank you!) and I liked the slideshow. Initial caching was weird (I know, you are just starting on it) as it kept reloading the 'player' with each new slide until the full page loaded(?) and then a regular slideshow presentation rendered as typically expected.
I have downloaded your DIG and will play with it (way cool!). Unfortunately since CCK-Views-Slideshows is above my paygrade (right now that is) I don't know how much of a help I will be but I do hope others more adept at Drupal and modules will gladly lend a hand.
No Wrong Way...
There's no wrong way, per se, to display a slideshow. It all depends on your goals. My method involves each image as its own node for a whole host of reasons. Using a video (or Flash slideshow or SlideShowPro embed, etc) is a different approach which offers much easier integration.
Embedding the slideshow as a video or other object is just fine. If you want to learn Drupal, however, teaching yourself the CCK/Views method will really help you in the long run.
Best,
Scott
Scott Rouse
http://about.me/scott.rouse
Thanks....
....aspirin, here I come!
Great discussion!
Of course this is a very hot topic in Drupal and web development in general. Christopher's questions are great, and Scott's responses continue to convince me that he is a golden resource for our little community, and well on his way to becoming a Drupal expert. AND, as a user of Slideshow Pro on a professional site, I'm very happy to hear from Emily that they now have a fallback option to HTML 5.
So I'm very happy people are using this group as a forum and hope it will continue to grow.
On the actual topic at hand, the answer as usual is 'it depends'. Depends on a number of things:
To sum up, my opinion: Flash is on the way out, video isn't appropriate or necessary for still images, and you'll get maximum reach (devices, accessibility, SEO) with the CCK/imagefield/Views method. Plus, you'll learn a buttload about Drupal and really build your skills.
I'd be happy to help teach a class or lead a meetup on this.
Lots to consider
Well Andy you said a mouth full. That's a good thing though.
Yes I see your and Scott's points clearly. Bandwidth is definitely a large considerations these days along with a site being ADA.
I have (right after Scott's reply) immersed myself in CCK-Views, etc. I had hoped that using video ported in from Youtube would add more bait in the water since people would already be at the main site and others may find the products/services via Youtube and it's Google power.
YES I would love either you and/or Scott to do a slideshow (photos especially) presentation. I am not there yet and still have much of the Views tute to complete (I follow along and build, it works for me) as I watch them first (to see where it is going) and then redo step by step. I did source Jeff Eaton's video on slideshows [ http://www.lullabot.com/articles/photo-galleries-views-attach ] and alas I missed something since my efforts hit a wall somewhere. Going through Views, I think I might be able to solve it. Still, learning all this is a blast and I thank you both for extremely great perspectives and sharing your experience.
Agreed with you both. Must learn CCK-Views as they are integral to site builds in Drupal. Going through the modules has impressed me with their power and scalability let alone granularity. Very impressive.
Thanks for your in-depth reply as you addressed just about everything related and I have much to consider.
Video SEO
<soapbox>Not to stray from the subject, but it's important that we, as web professionals, remain realistic about all of the SEO buzzwords we hear flying around.YouTube and other video outlets can rank high in search engine results, but not from sheer magic. It's the metadata, or "data about data" which we add to those videos (descriptions, titles, keywords, etc), which allow search engines (computers, not people) to identify their content. Simply slapping a video slideshow on a website does not, in itself, qualify as SEO. Quite the opposite, in fact. A CCK/Views implementation with each photo as a node with it's own
<title>tag, meta tags, and, more importantly, relevant information on a page is the most efficient way to allow a computer to understand what the subject of the image is.Google is on the verge of being able to programmatically identify the subject of some images, but there's much progress to be made. Video is even further away from this magical indexing nirvana.
Fellow programmers. Do not fall prey to the "attack of the SEO buzzwords" and succumb to the whim of every LinkedIn article or so-called "SEO Expert's" opinion. If you can't think of a way for a computer to easily understand the content of your site, a Search Engine won't be able to either.
</soapbox>Scott Rouse
http://about.me/scott.rouse