Juicebox v1.5.1 Released!

2016-05-31 17:24:08

The only difference between Showkase-Standard and Showkase-Pro is the bundled viewers. Showkase-Standard comes with Juicebox-Lite and SimpleViewer-Standard (the free versions) and Showkase-Pro comes with Juicebox-Pro and SimpleViewer-Pro.

As you already have Juicebox-Pro, you could purchase Showkase-Standard for $45 US (current price 31 May 2016) from the link on the purchase page and integrate your Juicebox-Pro files by following the instructions in the Installing a Pro Viewer support section.

If you wanted SimpleViewer-Pro too, then, as a Juicebox-Pro user, you could purchase Showkase-Pro for $50 US, the cost of Showkase-Pro ($95 US) minus the cost of Juicebox-Pro ($45 US). If you would like to do this, please let me know and I will contact you via email. Thank you.

2016-05-31 17:12:05

No problem!

2016-05-31 08:57:25

First of all, there is no reason why testing locally in Firefox should not work. Your local problem may have been due to a browser caching issue. The next time you try testing locally, try clearing your browser's cache before loading your gallery's web page.

There should also be no problem having your shared 'jbcore' folder one level up from your galleries.

You can certainly put your custom CSS in an external file and load it into your gallery's web page using a <link> tag.
Other than ensuring that your CSS file is present, all you would need to add to your gallery's web page is a <link> tag in the <head> section such as:

<link href="custom.css" rel="stylesheet">

Alternatively, you could modify the 'theme.css' template file that JuiceboxBuilder-Pro uses to generate each gallery's 'theme.css' file. The modified file would then be present in all galleries created by the application.
On a Windows PC, the location of the 'theme.css' template file is:
C:\Program Files (x86)\JuiceboxBuilder-Pro\template\jbcore\classic\theme.css

I hope these notes help.

2016-05-30 19:15:28

The bad news is that at the top of the page there is a statement: "Juicebox is currently on version 1.4.4.2";

Oops! Looks like that one slipped through the net. Now changed to "v1.5.0". Thank you for pointing it out.

... with the release of 1.5, is copying its jbcore directory to the web host sufficient to update existing galleries?

Yes (as long as you were previously using v1.4.4.2).
The change between v1.4.4.1 and v1.4.4.2 was to the 'index.html' files (generated by JuiceboxBuilder-Pro) to ensure that the correct meta viewport tag was included in the gallery web pages for iOS 9 support.
All the changes from v1.4.4.2 to v1.5.0 are in the 'jbcore' folder so swapping your 'jbcore' folders is all you need to do to upgrade your existing galleries.

If you are upgrading from v1.4.4.1 (or earlier) and are using the 'index.html' files generated by JuiceboxBuilder-Pro, I would recommend rebuilding your galleries with JuiceboxBuilder-Pro v1.5.0 (to upgrade both the 'index.html' files and 'jbcore' folders).
Otherwise, you could manually swap your 'jbcore' folders and ensure that the meta viewport tag (noted in this Juicebox blog entry) is in the head section of your gallery web pages.

2016-05-30 10:12:49

I thought I was being smart by uploading all the file into my root folder. because I wanted to embed in an old badly designed gallery page.

When using the baseUrl method of embedding, it does not matter where on your web server you upload the gallery folder to as long as the two paths in the embedding code (the path to the 'juicebox.js' file and the baseUrl itself, pointing towards the gallery folder) are correct.
You can essentially upload the gallery folder to anywhere on your server and still embed the gallery in any web page anywhere else on your server (as long as the paths in the embedding code are correct).

Of course uploading index file could have been a big problem.

Using the baseUrl method and keeping all the gallery files inside a gallery folder will prevent any existing files on your web server (such as an 'index.html' page) from being overwritten (as long as the name of the gallery folder itself does not clash with an existing directory name).

2016-05-30 10:03:26

You're welcome!
I'm glad my notes have been helpful.

2016-05-29 18:33:12

When you click the 'Open Gallery...' button, you should navigate towards and select the gallery folder (not a specific file).
The gallery folder must contain the gallery's XML file and the XML file must be named 'config.xml' (the default filename as used by JuiceboxBuilder).
If you have moved or renamed the XML file, the gallery will not be able to be opened by JuiceboxBuilder.

I recommend that you save each gallery to its own separate folder.
This should help to keep things organized and avoids the need to rename any XML files (which you would need to do if you stored multiple galleries in a single folder).
If you keep each gallery in its own folder and upload the complete gallery folders to your web server, then you can embed them in web pages using the baseUrl method of embedding as documented here.

I hope this helps.

2016-05-29 11:02:38

Many thanks for providing the links to your test galleries.

Using slightly larger images in your gallery might help.
I notice that your current images are 900px x 600px and, when using imageScaleMode="SCALE_DOWN", they will not be scaled up to fill the gallery's image area in a large viewport.
Using larger images should help to ensure that the images are displayed as large as possible within the gallery's image area.
Give it a try in another test gallery (perhaps using image dimensions of 1152px x 768px) and see how you get on viewing it on your iPad Air.

As long as the images are larger than the gallery's image area (which, in a responsive gallery, will depend on the size of the user's browser window), Juicebox will dynamically scale them down slightly to fit within the available space (and they will be displayed as large as they can be within the given area).

... the image is a little enlarged with a little less quality.

If you still see some degradation of image quality (even using larger images in your gallery), they try viewing the gallery in a different browser (Mobile Chrome, Mobile Firefox, Mobile Safari) to see if this makes a difference. Different browsers will likely have different resizing algorithms and you might find that certain browsers give more visually pleasing results than others when images are not displayed at their actual size. (Unfortunately, there is nothing that Juicebox can do to change the way that a browser displays an image at a specific size but it might be worth trying to at least eliminate browser differences as a possible cause.)

Hopefully this will help.

2016-05-28 09:57:05

I'm glad to hear that deselecting the 'Resize Images' checkbox is a suitable workaround for you.
Your original point (the inability to set the resize quality to 100%) has now been logged as an issue and hopefully it will be addressed in a future version.

2016-05-28 09:56:20

Well, I tried Top. But, on Ipad Air, when I hide thumbnails, the image is a little enlarged with a little less quality.
With Overlay, when I hide thumnails, image is the same and just a little go bottom. Perfect!
No problem with a PC.

It sounds like the problem might be due to images being scaled to different degrees in different browser viewport sizes and aspect ratios.

If you currently use imageScaleMode="SCALE", which scales down large images if necessary and also scales up small images (which can reduce their visual quality), then I would recommend that you use larger source images in your gallery so that images do not need to be scaled up. In addition to this, you could set imageScaleMode="SCALE_DOWN" (the default value) which would ensure that small images are never scaled up.
I hope this helps.

If you'd like me to take a look to see if I can help further, then please post the URL to your gallery's web page.
If you are not currently using a gallery layout which exhibits the problem, then perhaps you could upload a couple of screenshots somewhere so that I can at least see what you are seeing.
Of course, if you are happy with the current situation, that's absolutely fine.

2016-05-27 19:15:25

You're welcome!

2016-05-27 12:28:47

Clicking the Info Button toggles all content on the overlay (except for the Button Bar itself) including the Back Button if backButtonPosition="OVERLAY".
If you do not want the Back Button to be toggled on and off when the Info Button is clicked, then try setting backButtonPosition="TOP" instead. You could also set buttonBarPosition="TOP" to keep the Back Button and Button Bar on the same level.

Reference links:
Button Bar: https://www.juicebox.net/support/config … ar-options
Back Button: https://www.juicebox.net/support/config … on-options

2016-05-27 12:20:26

If the code you posted is all on a single page, then the problem is likely to be that the 'juicebox.js' file is being loaded twice.
The 'juicebox.js' file should be loaded only once per page rather than once per gallery.
If you load the JavaScript file multiple times, you can run into problems (especially if there are two different versions of the file being loaded).
Load only one instance of the 'juicebox.js' file (ideally the latest version) per page and things should hopefully work fine.

In addition, I had to manually set "OVERLAY_IMAGE" for the caption in the config xml file because it just wasn't applying through the app for some reason.

The default value for captionPosition is 'OVERLAY_IMAGE'. (This is noted in the Caption Options section of the Config Options page.)
Default values are not written to the 'config.xml' file.
If a configuration option is not explicitly listed in the gallery's XML file, then Juicebox-Pro will use its default value.
This is why you will not see captionPosition="OVERLAY_IMAGE" in your gallery's 'config.xml' file.
(If you manually enter captionPosition="OVERLAY_IMAGE" into your gallery's 'config.xml' file, it will have the same effect as omitting this configuration option entirely.)

2016-05-27 12:08:35

I have notified the developers of this but you might like to post your suggestion in the Feature Requests forum thread.
This keeps all the ideas together and ensures that they are not overlooked by the developers.
Thank you.

However, there should be very little visual difference between an image processed at 99% quality and the same image processed at 100% quality.
Also, I find that the law of diminishing returns usually kicks in somewhere around 90% when file size starts to rise considerably with little noticeable increase in visual quality.
JuiceboxBuilder-Pro's default value of 80% is usually a good compromise between file size and visual quality (although it will certainly depend on the images being compressed).

You could choose to resize your images in an imaging program (such as Adobe Photoshop) prior to using JuiceboxBuilder-Pro and deselect the 'Resize Images' checkbox on JuiceboxBuilder-Pro's 'Images' tab.
JuiceboxBuilder-Pro will then copy the source images across to the gallery's 'images' folder without resizing them at all.

2016-05-27 11:21:54

You're welcome!

2016-05-26 20:08:01

The changelog refers to a certain issue when using captionPosition="OVERLAY_IMAGE" whereby the width of the caption area did not match the width of the main image. (They should both be the same.)
The bugfix does not affect the caption area when using captionPosition="OVERLAY" (the default value) as you do in your gallery.
If you were to update your gallery to v1.5.0, there should be no change to your gallery's caption area.

I hope this puts your mind at ease.

2016-05-26 10:13:38

Make sure that your linkURL is an absolute path, for example http://www.example.com/folder/file.html.
If your linkURL does not start with http:// or https:// then it will be treated as a relative path (relative to the page containing the gallery's embedding code).

2016-05-25 20:27:57