Changing Uploaded Images

[Marc]

If you create an image and upload it to a web server then you make changes to said image and re-upload it, overwriting the first one, any links to that image should then reflect the changed version, yes?

My problem is that I'm not seeing the changes in those linked images.

For example, the banners I created for this year's POTY were changed by me so that the "Photographer of the Year" would no longer appear in italics but, when I look in the thread, they still appear in italics (except for Portrait as I had already changed that the first time around before uploading them). If I go to edit the post, the images appear correctly so I'm confident tat the correct versions are on the server. I've tried deleting cookies and cached images but to no avail.

I'm using Chrome but I've tried it on Firefox on y wife's macbook and even on Safari on my phone and get the same result so I'm baffled.

I'm guessing that others are seeing the correct versions but it still niggles me that I'm not.

 

[David_H]

Just looked at your thread link and they are - except for portrait - still appearing in italics.
I'm using Opera browser on a Win10 64 bit system.

 

[Marc]

Just done a screen print and crop of what I see in your signature. Is that the correct version that you want?

View attachment 92745

Sorry, should've said, the one in my signature is linked from Photobucket so isn't part of the issue.

 

[dinorock]

Hi marc I think you have to save a new image i.e. different file name then both will show for example on Flickr HTH Mike. something like edit.jpeg.

 

[David_H]

Sorry, should've said, the one in my signature is linked from Photobucket so isn't part of the issue.

Sorry Marc I was changing my reply whilst you were posting.

 

[Marc]

Hi marc I think you have to save a new image i.e. different file name then both will show for example on Flickr HTH Mike. something like edit.jpeg.

Yeah, I understand that's how it works with Flicker etc but this is via a web server so surely it should show the most up to date versions as the originals were overwritten and that also doesn't explain why they are correct when I go to edit the post.

Sorry Marc I was changing my reply whilst you were posting.

Thanks David, most odd as I though the problem was a local one.

 

[dinorock]

no i have had this before when updating it just says file no longer available I've always had to save a second image with a different file name.

 

[Marc]

no i have had this before when updating it just says file no longer available I've always had to save a second image with a different file name.

Interesting. I know I've done similar for the wife's website before without any issues although those were PDFs.

Ah well, wish I'd spotted the error before copying the thread across the sections. Looks like I've got some work to do.

Thanks Mike.

 

[dinorock]

I think your right about pdf's they are "live" files, which auto update

 

[neil_g]

Personally I'd always replace images with a new file name. I.e "banner-010117.png", and update the html to reference it.

Then you can guarantee that your customers are not seeing a cached version from their own browser history.

 

[petersmart]

Well they look fine to me using Win7 and no italics, just a pale blue b/g and straight font (whatever it is)

And I must say when I used to create a few websites I never had to change the filename if I updated an image, just overwriting the original image with the new one was enough to reflect the change, although in some cases it could take up to 24 hours for the changes to be reflected over the internet because the pages could be cached on many servers across the 'net.

And I cannot see the logic of going to all the trouble to change the links for such a simple thing.
.

 

[Marc]

Well they look fine to me using Win7 and no italics, just a pale blue b/g and straight font (whatever it is)

That would be because I did redo all the links yesterday evvening.

And I must say hwn I used to create a few websites I never had to change the filename if I updated an image, just overwriting the original image with the new one was enough to reflect the change.

And I cannot see the logic of going to all the trouble to change the links for such a simple thing.

I was thinking the same which is why I started the thread but it seems not to be the case.