none
Images on server not displaying, yet posted and partially visible depending on the browser. RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi Gang,

    I'm developing a website for a silent auction for a non-profit organization (http://elmorehumane.com/). 

    When the site is reviewed via Windows Explorer, the images are present.  When viewed via SuperPreview, the images are present.  When posted to the server, they are not visible.  When the details of the page are viewed on the web, the image markers are present.  When viewed via FireFox, no images.  When viewed via IE, one image is visible, but not the other only the frame.  Yes, I know the css is not fully developed; however, it should not have an impact on images displaying.

    I've flushed cache, renewed links and the problem continues.

    The two images are located in the right column:

    src="pictures/advertising/overton_properties.gif"
    src="pictures/advertising/Talladega.gif"

    I used a 3 column template, converted into a dwt and created needed pages from the dwt.

    Any helpful ideas would be appreciated!

    Thanks!

    Bob

    Saturday, March 24, 2012 3:37 AM

Answers

  • Bill/Kathy -

    Thanks for your help, but the problem persists to an unmanageable form of frustration.  As I said in my original post - I've flushed cashe multiple times.  Even others I ask to examine experience the same issues. 

    For some reason, other images suddenly are not appearing (depending on the browser used), yet, I've made no changes.

    I'm going to start from scratch using Dreamweaver to re-evaluate the matter.

    Thanks,

    Bob

    • Marked as answer by BamaBob Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:15 PM
    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:15 PM
  • I'm going to start from scratch using Dreamweaver to re-evaluate the matter.
    Here's a hint, Bob—if you are clueless in Expression Web, and you clearly are, you are going to be even more clueless in Dreamweaver. I have used DW from version MX through CS4, and both it and EW are professional-level development tools. If anything, EW has the edge on DW in the ease-of-use category (which is why, after all those years using Dreamweaver, I now do 75%–80% of my production development in Expression Web). Jim is telling it like it is, and all you're likely to learn from your "re-evaluation" of the matter is that Dreamweaver is damned expensive for a product that offers basically the same things as EW in a less transparent user interface.

    But, hey, you seem to have plenty of time on your hands, and unlimited funding (kinda odd for someone doing pro bono work for a charity, but there you are...), so have fun.  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott

    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    • Marked as answer by BamaBob Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:09 AM
    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:05 PM

All replies

  • http://elmorehumane.com/pictures/advertising/Talladega.gif  is not on the server.

    http://elmorehumane.com/pictures/advertising/talladega.gif  is on the server.  Windows servers, and your PC, don't make a distinction between the two, but your site is on a Linux varient server, and case matters to it.  Change the link in your page from Talladega to talladega.

    pictures/advertising/overton_properties.gif is on the server, and does show up.

    Saturday, March 24, 2012 4:11 AM
  • Hi Kathy,

    I doubled checked and the images are posted.  Using FF, view page source and scroll down - both images are are listed so I presume they are on the server.  Neither image shows in FF, my primary browser.  When on IE, one image is displayed.  Why a difference between browsers?

    As for the uppercase matter, on my PC, I have the name in lowercase and posted in lowercase, but is listed with a capital on the server.  As you described the difference between talladega and Talladega.  Why would this happen?

    I'm using the publishing feature of EW.  I'll test with a different FTP and report success/failure.

    Thanks,


    Bob

    Sunday, March 25, 2012 2:56 AM
  • The case difference can happen if you started with one (uppercase) and renamed it to the other (lowercase) inside EW.  As far as EW's metadata is concerned, the file wasn't renamed since they are the same thing on a Windows PC, and it publishes with the original name.

    The way to get it properly renamed in EW is to rename it to something completely different so EW knows it's different, let it update the links, then rename it back to the lowercase you want and let EW update the links again.  The extra step in the middle bypasses the "they aren't different' confusion.

    View source doesn't tell you if the images are on the server.  It only tells you that your source code calls for them, which is an entirely different matter.  Regardless, as I told you, both images are on the server, just one with a different case than you expected.  The way to tell that is not to look in the page source code, but to actually call for the image in your browser: see the image addresses in my earlier post.

    The first image displays in both Firefox and IE, for me.  Try clearing your temporary files, and cache, for Firefox, and try it again.  If it doesn't work, I can't tell you what is wrong with your Firefox view.

    Sunday, March 25, 2012 3:16 AM
  • Safari doesn't show either image. The first one displays in the developer tools, while the second does not. This is obviously because of the wrong case in the name that Kathy already pointed out. Fix that first, as that is the simple part.

    However, that right column is a mess of nested spans, strong tags and line breaks, which I believe is what has Safari (and possibly other browsers) confused. When I look at the displayed code in developer tools, it doesn't even show the image tags. The link for Talladega shows, but nothing referencing the image. Apparently, the way Safari interprets that jumbled code is: the end of your text, followed by three line breaks, followed by a link with nothing inside the tags, with many more line breaks after that.

    Why not redo the column and simplify the contents? I would bet that if you did so, your pictures would display (assuming they are named correctly). There is no reason to have all those spans, redundant classes, etc., nor do you need all those line breaks. Put the text in a paragraph with one class assigned, with no spans or strong tags. That one class can easily define how the text displays (centered, font-family, bold, etc.). Then, after the closing paragraph tag, place your images. Appropriate and orderly html structure is your friend...

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    Sunday, March 25, 2012 9:30 PM
  • Thanks for your feedback.  I'll work on fixing the CSS later tonight now that I have available time.

    When returning to revisit the site and confirm what is needed changing, both pictures appear in IE, but not FF!  Something magical happened since yesterday.  I guess this is good, but confusing as to why a problem on one day and okay the next with no changes made by the webmaster (me).

    Hopefully, once the CSS is cleaned up the errors will disappear. 

    I'll keep you updated!

    Thanks again!

    Bob

    Monday, March 26, 2012 12:49 AM
  • That's not a mystery; that's why Kathy told you to clear your browser caches. You were probably still looking at the old page, which the browser automatically pulled from its cache. Happens all the time.

    Comic Sans walks into a bar. The bartender says, "Get out! We don't serve your type."

    Monday, March 26, 2012 12:59 AM
  • Bill/Kathy -

    Thanks for your help, but the problem persists to an unmanageable form of frustration.  As I said in my original post - I've flushed cashe multiple times.  Even others I ask to examine experience the same issues. 

    For some reason, other images suddenly are not appearing (depending on the browser used), yet, I've made no changes.

    I'm going to start from scratch using Dreamweaver to re-evaluate the matter.

    Thanks,

    Bob

    • Marked as answer by BamaBob Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:15 PM
    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:15 PM
  • No, that isn't the answer. I hate to tell you this, but Dreamweaver is going to give the same results as EW. The problem is that you obviously have made changes, and not for the better. Your navigation doesn't work, your images are misbehaving, and your source code is full of weird spans, styles, mismatched tags, etc. That was done by you, not EW. I suggest you take the time to work through some of the learning resources available here before you continue. The page is only going to get worse if you continue down this road. That's not meant to be mean, just honest.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 5:26 PM
  •  EW is a professional level tool.  Dreamweaver is a much more expensive professional level tool.  They are comparable, and if you don't know what you are doing in one, moving to the other won't help.

    Start a new page from scratch in EW, *after* going through the resources recommended in the FAQ posting, especially the Basic Site Tutorial.

    Your marked answer is NOT the answer.  You should unmark it.
    • Edited by KathyW2 Tuesday, March 27, 2012 7:54 PM
    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 5:36 PM
  • I'm going to start from scratch using Dreamweaver to re-evaluate the matter.
    Here's a hint, Bob—if you are clueless in Expression Web, and you clearly are, you are going to be even more clueless in Dreamweaver. I have used DW from version MX through CS4, and both it and EW are professional-level development tools. If anything, EW has the edge on DW in the ease-of-use category (which is why, after all those years using Dreamweaver, I now do 75%–80% of my production development in Expression Web). Jim is telling it like it is, and all you're likely to learn from your "re-evaluation" of the matter is that Dreamweaver is damned expensive for a product that offers basically the same things as EW in a less transparent user interface.

    But, hey, you seem to have plenty of time on your hands, and unlimited funding (kinda odd for someone doing pro bono work for a charity, but there you are...), so have fun.  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott

    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    • Marked as answer by BamaBob Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:09 AM
    Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:05 PM
  • Hey Gang,

    Kathy - your process of renaming the file with the lowercase was helpful.  I kept reposting the lowercase file, but it showed as uppercase on the server.  Once I deleted the image on the server and republished, the lowercase file was finally present.  Unfortunately, the image still wouldn't display in Firefox.  Everything displayed okay in Internet Explore.  Why?

    In a more "newbie friendly forum," I discovered that if you have Adblock Plus, an add on for Firefox, it can cause problems with the displaying of images.  Sure enough, once I disabled Adblock for the site, everything was showing correctly.  Now, I can go back and clean up the messy code - which had no direct impact as to why an image would display in one browser but not another. 

    Scott!  What can I say to show my appreciation?  (Insert sarcastic tone here)  Most forums behave in a professional manner and help newbies rather than behave in a condescending manner.  Yes, I have plenty of time on my hands.  For the past seven years I've had over seven operations to save my legs.  The MRSA infection is being managed with four different IV antibiotics.  Another rod was inserted into another bone last month.  I'm in pain 24/7.  So yes.  I have a lot of time on my hands without any fun.  As for unlimited funding . . . the US Army will only help financially for so long.  I've been unemployed since I returned stateside.  What's wrong with using an old version of Dreamweaver?  Why should I with what little funds I have?  How much blood have you shed for your country?  Very little based from your tone.  Would you speak with your boss, your pastor, your spouse, your friend in this tone?  Funny how it is okay to do so to a complete stranger.  KMAREMF.

    I'll say goodbye to this forum.  TTFN.


    Bob

    Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:09 AM
  • Interesting coincidence, and you couldn't be much further off in your surmise if you tried. As it happens, I am at this very moment sitting in a wheel chair, in a VA medical facility, recovering from spinal cord surgery occasioned by cervical spondylosis, which was itself the result of 25 years living with degenerative rheumatoid arthritis and watching my body gradually lose functionality, bit by bit. I won't publicize my current pain meds protocol here, nor what I have lived with for the last two and a half decades, but I assure you that I have more than a passing familiarity with excruciating, chronic pain, only partially relieved by medication. 

    None of this is any of your damned business, nor anyone else's, but since you decided to throw a pity party for yourself, I felt the need to let you know that that crap carries no water, that you're not the only one here with problems, although most of us don't feel the need to wave them like a bloody flag (this is the first time in four years of regular participation here that I have revealed this information), and that you don't get to play the "I'm a disabled vet" card, because you're not the only one here, and that is completely irrelevant to this issue in any event. Capisc'?

    FWIW, what all of us, Jim, Kathy, and myself, each in our own way, have been trying to get across to you, and you have been resisting with all of your might, is that your problem is NOT with the software you are using, but with your level of knowledge and understanding of the basic principles that underlie Web development, HTML, CSS, and in this case, even basic file management across dissimilar operating systems.

    That last part means that you would have this same problem no matter what software you were using, even one of the purported easy to use "WYSIWYG" applications, because even they couldn't deal with the differing case sensitivity, and if you publish a page with an image's src attribute improperly cased for the actual file name to a Linux/Apache server, then guess what—it will not be found! Not if you publish with Dreamweaver, or Xara Web Designer, or Expression Web, or Serif WebPlus X5, or Notepad using IE's anemic FTP client, it does not matter, because the problem is NOT with the software, it is a symptom of the basic dichotomy between how two different operating systems handle case sensitivity, and of the developer's lack of understanding of that fact, and of what he must do to ensure that the problem does not arise. And that will not be changed by using a different development application, notwithstanding all wishful thinking to the contrary.

    You ask, "What's wrong with using an old version of Dreamweaver?" Well, in truth, nothing is inherently wrong with it. I could produce exactly the same work using my old copy of Dreamweaver MX2004 as I could using Expression Web 4, SP2. I wouldn't be nearly as productive, because EW4 (and DW CS4, for that matter) is so much better than DW MX2004. That's not the point, however. The point is that I can produce the same output, at the same quality level, even if it takes a bit longer, because I know HTML, CSS, javascript, site and server management, and all of the other technologies upon which successful Web development is based. The choice of editor and publishing tool does not determine my ability to do Web development (nor anyone else's, either), but just the productivity, the amount of my own time required per unit output, with which I can generate my product.

    And the same is true for any developer, including you. It doesn't matter what your particular personal circumstances are—the Web doesn't care. You must have the necessary knowledge if you wish to become a professional developer, which does appear to be your goal. There are no shortcuts, and switching around among the various development apps will not confer that knowledge. That is what Kathy tried to say:

    EW is a professional level tool.  Dreamweaver is a much more expensive professional level tool.  They are comparable, and if you don't know what you are doing in one, moving to the other won't help.

    Start a new page from scratch in EW, *after* going through the resources recommended in the FAQ posting, especially the Basic Site Tutorial.

    Your marked answer is NOT the answer.  You should unmark it.

    And what Jim told you, in his own way:

    No, that isn't the answer. I hate to tell you this, but Dreamweaver is going to give the same results as EW. The problem is that you obviously have made changes, and not for the better. Your navigation doesn't work, your images are misbehaving, and your source code is full of weird spans, styles, mismatched tags, etc. That was done by you, not EW. I suggest you take the time to work through some of the learning resources available here before you continue. The page is only going to get worse if you continue down this road. That's not meant to be mean, just honest.

    And, although admittedly I tend to be somewhat more brusque than my colleagues, if you re-read my post you will see that I was basically saying exactly what they said, adding the element of my own long experience using both packages. Yeah, I'll grant that I was a bit sarcastic; that's a failing of mine. But a perusal of my posts will show that I will also bend over backwards, sparing no effort to try to help resolve a legitimate question, building test-case pages and running exhaustive tests, often providing complete source code, both HTML/CSS and, if necessary, javascript/jQuery, to help the OP both resolve the issue and, more importantly, understand why the resolution works, so that the next time s/he faces a similar situation s/he will know how to resolve it themselves. Again, knowledge is the key!

    So, I'm sorry that you took offense at the tone of my reply, but I still maintain that the substance of it was dead on. You lack the necessary knowledge, and you will still lack it using Dreamweaver, whether it is phrased in that more "polite" fashion, or is stated in the less genteel, but equally accurate, "Here's a hint, Bob—if you are clueless in Expression Web, and you clearly are, you are going to be even more clueless in Dreamweaver." Both ways of expressing that same truth are equally true, although one may be more palatable to you. The "even more" modifier comes from the fact that Dreamweaver loses out to EW in the "ease-of-use" category, which is why I and other long-time users of Dreamweaver are now primarily EW users and, as it happens, major contributors to this forum.

    So, what I would advise is that you forget about your current circumstances—you can't change them, and we've all got our own sack of rocks to carry around, one way or another. That's just life, and you deal with it. You bow up, deal with them the best you can, and carry on. In the meantime, if you really, truly want to do this professionally, you learn what you need to know to be a professional. See the Learning Resources section in the Forum FAQs and Guidelines - Start Here, and start with the w3schools courses at http://w3schools.com/html/ and http://w3schools.com/css/. Then go on to Cheryl's "Build a Basic Web Site" video tutorial (which Kathy mentioned above), at http://by-expression.com/post/2009/09/22/Basic-Website-Tutorial.aspx, which will give you a good intro to using EW's visual interface to apply those principles in your own sites. Knowledge is key, and you don't get it by switching dev packages, but by learning it, drab as that may sound. Might as well get started, and good luck!  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:23 PM
  • Surprisingly, it turns out this was the issue for me in Safari (and Firefox, and Chrome). I had never seen this issue before, as simple linked images always display normally (since the add-on is supposed to, well... block advertising). Apparently the problem is that the images are in a folder named "advertising"! I would bet that changing that name would prevent AdBlock from having any effect on the page. However, I will point out that most people like me who use AdBlock would never think to disable it just to see images on a page. The complete lack of alt text wouldn't even allow them to know that images were supposed to be there. You can turn it off in your browser and think that the problem is fixed, but it will still exist for every other viewer that uses AdBlock. Try changing that folder name!

    Of course, the lack of alt text is a huge issue that hasn't even been addressed here. Your navigation is all image-based, without the necessary alt text, thereby making it completely inaccessible to anyone using a screen reader, or who has images blocked. Try temporarily disabling images on that page and see what is left. It's not very useful. Just add the appropriate alt text to the images, and it would greatly improve the usability.

    Jim

    Edit: Oops, I meant to insert the OP's quote about AdBlock being the problem, but messed up and forgot to do so. See his most recent post for context.


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine


    • Edited by fcphdJim Thursday, March 29, 2012 5:48 PM missing information
    Thursday, March 29, 2012 5:45 PM