My Own Web Site

Topic

New Reply

OK. I am totally new to all of this. That being said, all I want to do is make a web site that I can have a photo album on. I have tried FreeWebs and Earthlink but they tend to be cutesy. I just want a web address to send my friends to when I am posting pics. A blank page full of thumbnails that when clicked will allow the user to navigate between photos or back to the index of thumbnails. I am trying Photoshop Elements and might buy it. It makes just the kind of web page I want. But my question is, how do I upload the web page along with all the folders it created to a web site. And of course I’d like it to be free.

TIA

Reply | Quote

Replies

If you want to design your own albums, you can choose a host based on the technologies you’re using. For example, FrontPage might want to create ASP pages, and you’d have to confirm ASP support by the host. Many packages use PHP, so you’d need host support for that. Of course, everyone supports HTML.

If you’re interested in sites that specialize in photos, there are the “lots of pop-ups” ones like WebShots, that make it very easy for you and your visitors, and there are the less commercial ones like pbase.com that also are easy to post to, but perhaps don’t have all the bells and whistles for visitors. Both PBase and WebShots have a limit for free hosting (either number of photos or number of megabytes).

Someday I’ll get around to doing an album… in my free time.

WebShots examples: http://community.webshots.com/user/jscher2k%5B/url%5D
PBase examples: http://www.pbase.com/jscher2000%5B/url%5D
Roll-your-own example #1: http://jscher2000.home.att.net/lightning/light2.html%5B/url%5D
Roll-your-own example #2: http://jscher2000.home.att.net/july4/2003RC.html%5B/url%5D (slow, pre-loads photos)

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the info. I will look closer at the first two [webshots and pbase] but I am interested in the 2 “roll-your-owns.” Are those examples of a site you developed? And if so, how did you publish it? I guess that’s what I don’t understand. How do I “publish” the web page that Photoshop created? Are there places that will let you publish what you already have? And are those sites that you have to pay for? While I agree with bigaldoc [You get what you pay for], it just seems silly at this point – while I experiment.

And you lost me on ASP and PHP – I’m guessing those are a different code than HTML…

Reply | Quote

The two I rolled were hand-coded experiments. I still haven’t found what I’m looking for (in the way of photo album formats).

I use my free web space on my dial-up account (10MB per screen name up to 60MB, not the most efficient way to get 60MB!), and upload using either the one-file-at-a-time approach (web form, similar to attaching a file to a Lounge post), or an FTP program. The one-at-a-time approach is useful when you spot an error and want to upload a corrected file and view it again. Otherwise, it’s a hassle.

There are free FTP programs out there, but, due to security restrictions, I had to use a trial version of a more professional FTP program that could make a secure connection to AT&T’s server. The interface is similar to Windows Explorer: you create folders and drag files, but the destination is your web space. (Windows XP includes a free command-line FTP program for batch file fans [is JohnGray reading?], but it doesn’t do SSL.)

Some web page editors will allow you to connect to a server and directly edit files there. It’s generally more efficient, though, to make the changes locally and then upload the new file. And you can be sure that you have a backup.

Added: FTP stands for file transfer protocol, but is often used as a verb, to FTP meaning to upload or download using file transfer protocol.

Reply | Quote

The two I rolled were hand-coded experiments. I still haven’t found what I’m looking for (in the way of photo album formats).

I use my free web space on my dial-up account (10MB per screen name up to 60MB, not the most efficient way to get 60MB!), and upload using either the one-file-at-a-time approach (web form, similar to attaching a file to a Lounge post), or an FTP program. The one-at-a-time approach is useful when you spot an error and want to upload a corrected file and view it again. Otherwise, it’s a hassle.

There are free FTP programs out there, but, due to security restrictions, I had to use a trial version of a more professional FTP program that could make a secure connection to AT&T’s server. The interface is similar to Windows Explorer: you create folders and drag files, but the destination is your web space. (Windows XP includes a free command-line FTP program for batch file fans [is JohnGray reading?], but it doesn’t do SSL.)

Some web page editors will allow you to connect to a server and directly edit files there. It’s generally more efficient, though, to make the changes locally and then upload the new file. And you can be sure that you have a backup.

Added: FTP stands for file transfer protocol, but is often used as a verb, to FTP meaning to upload or download using file transfer protocol.

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

ASP and PHP – I’m guessing those are a different code than HTML

---

[/indent]Well, yes – and no. ASP is Microsoft’s Active Server Pages and the way it works is that you write code in ASP, and it generates HTML when your web browser requests the page. PHP works in much the same way but is an open format and was designed to complement HTML. It is easier to learn than ASP since it takes its style from HTML.

In both cases the idea is to allow for dynamic pages. A database usually sits on the back end somewhere, and the ASP/PHP code pulls the requested information from that database, generating a dynamic page that can change based on what the user wants to see.

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

ASP and PHP – I’m guessing those are a different code than HTML

---

[/indent]Well, yes – and no. ASP is Microsoft’s Active Server Pages and the way it works is that you write code in ASP, and it generates HTML when your web browser requests the page. PHP works in much the same way but is an open format and was designed to complement HTML. It is easier to learn than ASP since it takes its style from HTML.

In both cases the idea is to allow for dynamic pages. A database usually sits on the back end somewhere, and the ASP/PHP code pulls the requested information from that database, generating a dynamic page that can change based on what the user wants to see.

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the info. I will look closer at the first two [webshots and pbase] but I am interested in the 2 “roll-your-owns.” Are those examples of a site you developed? And if so, how did you publish it? I guess that’s what I don’t understand. How do I “publish” the web page that Photoshop created? Are there places that will let you publish what you already have? And are those sites that you have to pay for? While I agree with bigaldoc [You get what you pay for], it just seems silly at this point – while I experiment.

And you lost me on ASP and PHP – I’m guessing those are a different code than HTML…

Reply | Quote

If you want to design your own albums, you can choose a host based on the technologies you’re using. For example, FrontPage might want to create ASP pages, and you’d have to confirm ASP support by the host. Many packages use PHP, so you’d need host support for that. Of course, everyone supports HTML.

If you’re interested in sites that specialize in photos, there are the “lots of pop-ups” ones like WebShots, that make it very easy for you and your visitors, and there are the less commercial ones like pbase.com that also are easy to post to, but perhaps don’t have all the bells and whistles for visitors. Both PBase and WebShots have a limit for free hosting (either number of photos or number of megabytes).

Someday I’ll get around to doing an album… in my free time.

WebShots examples: http://community.webshots.com/user/jscher2k%5B/url%5D
PBase examples: http://www.pbase.com/jscher2000%5B/url%5D
Roll-your-own example #1: http://jscher2000.home.att.net/lightning/light2.html%5B/url%5D
Roll-your-own example #2: http://jscher2000.home.att.net/july4/2003RC.html%5B/url%5D (slow, pre-loads photos)

Reply | Quote

I’m sorry to repeat the old cliche, but you get what you PAY for! From all of the so-called free web hosts I’ve seen, there are enough “negatives” that you really should start looking at fee based web hosts. Space limitation, bandwidth and mandatory advertising are the biggest negatives, in MY opinion. There are a number (plenty) of web hosts in the less-than $10 per month range to choose from that I think you should start on that search first. The process of uploading to MOST web sites involves simply using a decent FTP program, of which there are many.

Reply | Quote

I’m sorry to repeat the old cliche, but you get what you PAY for! From all of the so-called free web hosts I’ve seen, there are enough “negatives” that you really should start looking at fee based web hosts. Space limitation, bandwidth and mandatory advertising are the biggest negatives, in MY opinion. There are a number (plenty) of web hosts in the less-than $10 per month range to choose from that I think you should start on that search first. The process of uploading to MOST web sites involves simply using a decent FTP program, of which there are many.

Reply | Quote

I know you are looking to use your own web site to show your pics. But since other methods have been tossed around, I will add one…..

I use http://www.shutterfly.com/home/signin_member.jsp%5B/url%5D.

It is fast and easy to upload your pics and the best part is that when I send a link to share the pics to someone, they DO NOT have to sign up to look at the pics. Some sites require that you do, and some are hesitant to do so for privacy.

I think this type of sharing your pics can be used nicely, while you tackle learning how to do your own site.

And it is free.

Reply | Quote

Michael,
I checked out Shutterfly and yes, it is easy and quick and free. And it is better than what I had been using [Ofoto] because you don’t have to sign in. And I probably will use it until I can figure out what, if anything, I can do better. I know what I want but just lack the knowledge to know how to get there. Here is an example of a web page a friend has – and it is exactly what I want. http://80.126.213.52/~roos/dotkom/images/f…/dot_lotje.html%5B/url%5D See, simple, plain, and the user has the ability to navigate between pictures and/or return to the index.

I showed that linke to an IT guy at work and asked if he knew how I could do the same thing. He said the 80.126 etc part of the link suggests that she has her own webserver and that would cost around $3K. Now granted I didn’t go into a lot of detail, and this guy is more into IT support but it sounds like I will just have to keep looking for info/sites. There must be something out there that I can afford that will do what I want.

What do you think of her link – does it look like a server?

PS. Aren’t her doggies cute?

Reply | Quote

The 80.126.etc. simply means that your friend is using the ‘real’ Internet address of the server vs. a domain name. It really doesn’t mean that she has her own server although it’s likely. You can set up this type of address with ISP’s servers but you’re taking a risk-the ISP can change the ‘real’ address at any time, thus invalidating your link. If you use the domain name then it doesn’t matter if the ‘real’ address changes-the ISP will reassign the domain name whenever they change that real address.

As for setting up a web site, essentially I’d advise you to set it up on your PC then transfer the entire set up to a ‘blank’ web site. You transfer it using an FTP program. There’s plenty of ‘gotchas’ in this-the most common are transferring from a case-insensitive system to a case-sensitive one (that’s bitten me a couple of times) and failing to use relative addresses (that I always watch out for). If you’re not sure what I’m talking about then you probably have some learning to do before setting up a web site this way. Google some HTML tutorials or even the specific term ‘relative link’.

Reply | Quote

The 80.126.etc. simply means that your friend is using the ‘real’ Internet address of the server vs. a domain name. It really doesn’t mean that she has her own server although it’s likely. You can set up this type of address with ISP’s servers but you’re taking a risk-the ISP can change the ‘real’ address at any time, thus invalidating your link. If you use the domain name then it doesn’t matter if the ‘real’ address changes-the ISP will reassign the domain name whenever they change that real address.

As for setting up a web site, essentially I’d advise you to set it up on your PC then transfer the entire set up to a ‘blank’ web site. You transfer it using an FTP program. There’s plenty of ‘gotchas’ in this-the most common are transferring from a case-insensitive system to a case-sensitive one (that’s bitten me a couple of times) and failing to use relative addresses (that I always watch out for). If you’re not sure what I’m talking about then you probably have some learning to do before setting up a web site this way. Google some HTML tutorials or even the specific term ‘relative link’.

Reply | Quote

He’s nuts!! Or at least he didn’t consider all of the evidence. The ~roos part of the URL is the universal sign that this is a shared server, and probably not an expensive account at all.

But either way, yes, you can do this. The comments at the top of the page (in HTML comment tags, so you don’t see them displayed) say:

built with: QuickNailer 1.7.1 68K by Stephen Baber & Softwhir
latest version: http://www.amug.org/~sbaber[/list]Hope this helps.

Reply | Quote

And “QuickNailer ” is for the Mac, on all searches I see.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

I might have known from the *mug domain. It’s still useful to a fraction of the computing public.

Reply | Quote

I might have known from the *mug domain. It’s still useful to a fraction of the computing public.

Reply | Quote

And “QuickNailer ” is for the Mac, on all searches I see.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

He’s nuts!! Or at least he didn’t consider all of the evidence. The ~roos part of the URL is the universal sign that this is a shared server, and probably not an expensive account at all.

But either way, yes, you can do this. The comments at the top of the page (in HTML comment tags, so you don’t see them displayed) say:

built with: QuickNailer 1.7.1 68K by Stephen Baber & Softwhir
latest version: http://www.amug.org/~sbaber[/list]Hope this helps.

Reply | Quote

This sort of thumbnail-to-full size picture is easy to do with Thumbsplus http://www.cerious.com/%5B/url%5D. What it does is creates the HTML code to display a grid of pictures with links that the user can click to view the larger image. It also acts as an album on your computer too.

You then of course still need a web server (your own or one you rent space on) to post the files. You can download a trial version of this software and practice creating a web page with one of their templates (which you can later edit as you learn more HTML).

I did see a cheap web server recently (probably mention on The Lounge), http://www.jodohost.com/%5B/url%5D. The nice thing is you can sign up with a sub-domain name (http://www.yourname.jodohost.com) and see how it works. You can at least try it to upload your pictures (the ones made from Thumbsplus for example) and go through the exercise (learning experience) of getting the pix from your PC to a public web site. I haven’t found other web hosts that let you do this on a trial basis. If you don’t have your own domain name registered, there are still plenty of other hosts that can create one for you off of their name (like Yahoo’s web hosting, etc.). Usually they come with a fixed set of templates for web pages and don’t allow you to customize much but it’s a start.

Deb

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the info and I think you all have answered my questions. The short answer is I would need to pay about 8.50/yr for a a domain name and [using jodohost as an example] $170/mo for the server – or I could get it through my Earthlink connection for around $40/mo. In any event, for what I want to use it for – sporadic postings of pics – it isn’t worth it. It didn’t hurt to look into it. And I will keep researching to see if there are any less expensive alternatives.

Again thanks for all of the answers.

Reply | Quote

Sherry – do you really need to purchase a dedicated server? Most people use shared hosting for MUCH less!!

I use Jodohost for my wedding site (see my signature). I use their Value Windows plan for $6.95 per month. From what you’ve indicated, I can’t imagine why you would need anything more!

The Value plan from Jodohost (similar to other hosts) has 200MB of space and a very generous 5GB of transfer. If that’s not enough for you, pay an extra $6 per month (total $12.95) and get all of that doubled…

Unless you have a specific business-related site that expects a ton of traffic along with heavy database and application access you should be just fine with a shared hosting account.

Hope this helps

Reply | Quote

Sherry – do you really need to purchase a dedicated server? Most people use shared hosting for MUCH less!!

I use Jodohost for my wedding site (see my signature). I use their Value Windows plan for $6.95 per month. From what you’ve indicated, I can’t imagine why you would need anything more!

The Value plan from Jodohost (similar to other hosts) has 200MB of space and a very generous 5GB of transfer. If that’s not enough for you, pay an extra $6 per month (total $12.95) and get all of that doubled…

Unless you have a specific business-related site that expects a ton of traffic along with heavy database and application access you should be just fine with a shared hosting account.

Hope this helps

Reply | Quote

I will second Mark on the cost issue – dedicated servers are not what you need! They are usually for large business and e-commerce. For my personal site I use Globat and have found their price unbeatable for what they offer.

The domain name will cost you about $70 USD up front, depending on how long you want to register it for. Typically the longer you purchase rights to the name the cheaper the price gets…

Reply | Quote

Mark, if you buy from a lesser known provider, you can get domains for much, much less. DirectNIC and 1and1 are $15 and $5.99 per year, respectively. They might not include the right kinds of domain management in that bargain basement price, but the additional increment is not going to get you up to VeriSign’s and Register.com’s $35/year. Thank goodness for competition!

Reply | Quote

I am using the 1and1.com $9.99/mo service and it is working great. See http://order.1and1.com/xml/order/HostingBu…0a?__frame=_top%5B/url%5D

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Oh right, that price actually includes the domain registration, doesn’t it. Three actually! It’s a good deal. And the 90-day money-back guarantee helps, too.

Reply | Quote

Oh right, that price actually includes the domain registration, doesn’t it. Three actually! It’s a good deal. And the 90-day money-back guarantee helps, too.

Reply | Quote

I am using the 1and1.com $9.99/mo service and it is working great. See http://order.1and1.com/xml/order/HostingBu…0a?__frame=_top%5B/url%5D

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Ahh, good point. I just went quick and dirty when I registered my domain a few years ago, never looked around. I think at that time you had no other choice though…or is my memory just getting dodgy? I seem to recall that Network Solutions lost exclusive rights about two years back.

Reply | Quote

It’s been a long time since NSI had the exclusive, but it took quite a few years for others to become well established and credible enough for anyone to trust them. I mean, would you want to have to explain to management why you lost your domain because you used “Tucows” or “Go daddy”?

Reply | Quote

It’s been a long time since NSI had the exclusive, but it took quite a few years for others to become well established and credible enough for anyone to trust them. I mean, would you want to have to explain to management why you lost your domain because you used “Tucows” or “Go daddy”?

Reply | Quote

Ahh, good point. I just went quick and dirty when I registered my domain a few years ago, never looked around. I think at that time you had no other choice though…or is my memory just getting dodgy? I seem to recall that Network Solutions lost exclusive rights about two years back.

Reply | Quote

Mark, if you buy from a lesser known provider, you can get domains for much, much less. DirectNIC and 1and1 are $15 and $5.99 per year, respectively. They might not include the right kinds of domain management in that bargain basement price, but the additional increment is not going to get you up to VeriSign’s and Register.com’s $35/year. Thank goodness for competition!

Reply | Quote

I will second Mark on the cost issue – dedicated servers are not what you need! They are usually for large business and e-commerce. For my personal site I use Globat and have found their price unbeatable for what they offer.

The domain name will cost you about $70 USD up front, depending on how long you want to register it for. Typically the longer you purchase rights to the name the cheaper the price gets…

Reply | Quote

a couple of things. Unless you are hosting several websites, a dedicated box is not necessary (as everyone said) I run a web development business and I use maddogdomains.com for all my clients. Registration and hosting. I would’ve went with 1and1 if I knew about it. They have a great deal. As far as the photo albums, I use yapp-ng.

http://www.thewolfmans.com/photo%5B/url%5D

i use it for all my & friends personal site. Easy to admin and its yours, no limits. (except for your hosting limits ie space, bandwidth)

Reply | Quote

Can you provide a link to “yapp-ng”, as Google can not find it?

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Sorry Dave, I misspelled it. It’s yappa-ng (Yet Another Php Photo Album – Next Generation)

http://www.zirkon.at/zirkon/scripts/yappa-…g_main_eng.html%5B/url%5D

Reply | Quote

When will those open source guys start coming up with decent product names?

Reply | Quote

at least our products work…

Reply | Quote

Sure they do, after hours and hours of assembly and …and even then they won’t even play Quake 3….

Reply | Quote

Maybe for the ‘wanna-be-root” windoze users, but I have no problem getting anhything to run under the best OS EVER –

LINUX BABY!!! WOO-HOO

(consider this thread hyjacked – by Mark)

Reply | Quote

Sure they do, after hours and hours of assembly and …and even then they won’t even play Quake 3….

Reply | Quote

at least our products work…

Reply | Quote

When will those open source guys start coming up with decent product names?

Reply | Quote

Thanks, I will check it out

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Thanks, I will check it out

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Sorry Dave, I misspelled it. It’s yappa-ng (Yet Another Php Photo Album – Next Generation)

http://www.zirkon.at/zirkon/scripts/yappa-…g_main_eng.html%5B/url%5D

Reply | Quote

a couple of things. Unless you are hosting several websites, a dedicated box is not necessary (as everyone said) I run a web development business and I use maddogdomains.com for all my clients. Registration and hosting. I would’ve went with 1and1 if I knew about it. They have a great deal. As far as the photo albums, I use yapp-ng.

http://www.thewolfmans.com/photo%5B/url%5D

i use it for all my & friends personal site. Easy to admin and its yours, no limits. (except for your hosting limits ie space, bandwidth)

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the info and I think you all have answered my questions. The short answer is I would need to pay about 8.50/yr for a a domain name and [using jodohost as an example] $170/mo for the server – or I could get it through my Earthlink connection for around $40/mo. In any event, for what I want to use it for – sporadic postings of pics – it isn’t worth it. It didn’t hurt to look into it. And I will keep researching to see if there are any less expensive alternatives.

Again thanks for all of the answers.

Reply | Quote

This sort of thumbnail-to-full size picture is easy to do with Thumbsplus http://www.cerious.com/%5B/url%5D. What it does is creates the HTML code to display a grid of pictures with links that the user can click to view the larger image. It also acts as an album on your computer too.

You then of course still need a web server (your own or one you rent space on) to post the files. You can download a trial version of this software and practice creating a web page with one of their templates (which you can later edit as you learn more HTML).

I did see a cheap web server recently (probably mention on The Lounge), http://www.jodohost.com/%5B/url%5D. The nice thing is you can sign up with a sub-domain name (http://www.yourname.jodohost.com) and see how it works. You can at least try it to upload your pictures (the ones made from Thumbsplus for example) and go through the exercise (learning experience) of getting the pix from your PC to a public web site. I haven’t found other web hosts that let you do this on a trial basis. If you don’t have your own domain name registered, there are still plenty of other hosts that can create one for you off of their name (like Yahoo’s web hosting, etc.). Usually they come with a fixed set of templates for web pages and don’t allow you to customize much but it’s a start.

Deb

Reply | Quote

Michael,
I checked out Shutterfly and yes, it is easy and quick and free. And it is better than what I had been using [Ofoto] because you don’t have to sign in. And I probably will use it until I can figure out what, if anything, I can do better. I know what I want but just lack the knowledge to know how to get there. Here is an example of a web page a friend has – and it is exactly what I want. http://80.126.213.52/~roos/dotkom/images/f…/dot_lotje.html%5B/url%5D See, simple, plain, and the user has the ability to navigate between pictures and/or return to the index.

I showed that linke to an IT guy at work and asked if he knew how I could do the same thing. He said the 80.126 etc part of the link suggests that she has her own webserver and that would cost around $3K. Now granted I didn’t go into a lot of detail, and this guy is more into IT support but it sounds like I will just have to keep looking for info/sites. There must be something out there that I can afford that will do what I want.

What do you think of her link – does it look like a server?

PS. Aren’t her doggies cute?

Reply | Quote

I know you are looking to use your own web site to show your pics. But since other methods have been tossed around, I will add one…..

I use http://www.shutterfly.com/home/signin_member.jsp%5B/url%5D.

It is fast and easy to upload your pics and the best part is that when I send a link to share the pics to someone, they DO NOT have to sign up to look at the pics. Some sites require that you do, and some are hesitant to do so for privacy.

I think this type of sharing your pics can be used nicely, while you tackle learning how to do your own site.

And it is free.

Reply | Quote

Doesn’t your ISP offer web space as part of your access package? That is very common here.

Reply | Quote

Doesn’t your ISP offer web space as part of your access package? That is very common here.

Reply | Quote