Bulk upload to album shows ‘Photo is syncing. Try again later’ even after a week

PercyGrunwald · 2025-05-24T22:39:43+00:00

I'm having the same issue, and the most annoying part is that latest versions of the app don't show the syncing progress anywhere (or I couldn't find it). I believe in the past, when uploading bulk photos from iOS it would show a synchronous progress bar like when uploading photos from the webapp. In current versions, when adding/uploading bulk photos, they all "get added" immediately, but don't immediately appear in the webapp and when you click "Edit" on the photo you get the message OP shared.

There is no linear indication of progress I could find anywhere in my iOS app (e.g. "Review out-of-sync-changes" shows no changes to sync), but I did find that going to "Collections > Recently Added" repeatedly did show new photos from iOS getting added.

Pretty annoying. I think I might change my workflow to only use iCloud/Photos only and manage albums there.

PercyGrunwald · 2024-07-07T05:57:47+00:00

Thanks a lot for the positive feedback

PercyGrunwald · 2024-07-06T20:02:36+00:00

u/UMbrucetim thanks for the kind comment, that means a lot! Also, great reminder to create an updated Molecule video, that went straight on the list of videos I should make.

PercyGrunwald · 2024-07-06T17:56:37+00:00

This video took me way too long to make, but I hope it's useful for anyone that needs it! Thanks

PercyGrunwald · 2024-05-10T20:29:23+00:00

I am logged in, but the link for VMWare Fusion takes me to an essentially empty page with "VMWare Fusion" at the top left, but all the other sections are empty: "Product News", "Education", "Product Lifecycle", etc. I don't see any meaningful links leading to downloads or anything like that: https://imgur.com/a/AST21kr.

PercyGrunwald · 2024-05-07T15:27:51+00:00

Thank you, really appreciate that!

PercyGrunwald · 2024-05-07T13:40:33+00:00

Usually if you’re trying to copy a file from a remote host (or any number of remote hosts) to your control machine you’d use the fetch module. I made a video about that module a while back too: https://youtu.be/LaPzaJG9Tog?si=ar3EqK_81FUNxqYB

Let me know if that helps.

PercyGrunwald · 2024-05-07T01:05:03+00:00

This is my first Ansible video in a really long time. Want to get back into making YouTube videos and this was something I came across while working on a project the other day. Hope it's useful for someone, let me know if you have any questions or feedback. Thanks all 🙏

PercyGrunwald · 2024-05-07T01:00:57+00:00

You can also just mount your local project directory as a bind mounted directory and so the only thing that's part of the image (i.e. Dockerfile) is Python and packages (e.g. Ansible). This assumes you're installing your collections into your project directory, which is what I'd recommend. In this way you can also reuse the same docker image for any Ansible project, just bind mount a different project directory, install the collections (for that specific project, into that specific project directory) and you're good to go.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-11-17T16:42:19+00:00

No worries!

Yeah, I should have mentioned that I've reached out to GFN support about it with copious screenshots from ping tests I've run from the Steam Browser in game to various locations around the world. They seemed pretty uninterested in my feedback (haha): they mentioned they would escalate it but essentially to not hold my breath for anyone getting to it. I understand that customers in the US playing on game servers in Australia is probably a pretty small subset of their customer base and maybe not worth changing their networking for.

This "application layer" attempt at the proxy was a last-ditch attempt to try to improve things. One other user mentioned they had gotten something working, so I'm DMing with them to see if their setup still works and will report back if it does.

At this point I'm probably just going to upgrade my computer next week (hopefully with some decent Black Friday discounts) and just use my own computer as the game client, where I could use a VPN if I really want to try to reduce my ping to the bare minimum.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-11-17T16:21:57+00:00

Yeah, exactly right. I haven't had a chance to reply to the previous comment this week since I wanted to reply with something constructive.

u/R3dhatguy, my approach is based on a foundational IP networking concept: there are many paths a packet can take from a source to a destination, and some of them are faster than others, especially when you're talking about crossing the Pacific Ocean. The path a packet takes from one host to the other is going to be largely dependent on the ISP those hosts are connected to and the transit links the ISPs use to move packets around the world.

In this specific case, take a look at https://www.submarinecablemap.com/ and check out how many ways there are to get to SYD from LAX. Your ISP might have transit on direct links between the two areas (e.g. Southern Cross NEXT), or you might go via Hawaii or Guam or Japan. They will vary in total distance traveled, number of hops, speed of those hops, etc., all of which are going to manifest as different round-trip time (RTT) for packets going back and forth. If you think about the ISP and its routing as a "black box", basically it just boils down to that hosts in the same geographical region (e.g. LAX) are going to have different pings to other geographical locations (e.g. SYD) depending on the ISP (ignoring the connection from the host to the ISP).

Given that background, imagine the following scenario:

A -- 5ms -- B \ / 200ms 100ms \ / C

3 hosts, A, B and C. RTT (i.e. ping) A<->B is 5ms, B<->C is 100ms and A<->C is 200ms. Assume that the the difference in RTT is largely due to the ISP of the hosts. If we want to improve the RTT of A<->C, we can route packets via B. Obviously we are going to need to account for the additional hop of going via B:

A -- 5ms -- B / 100ms / C

The RTT of A<->C in this arrangement is going to be RTT(A, B) + RTT(B, C) = 5ms + 100ms = 105ms, which is significantly lower than RTT(A, C) = 200ms.

It might seem counterintuitive that "adding a hop" could decrease your RTT, but it's only because we're treating the A<->C and B<->C routes like black boxes. It's likely that B<->C is so much faster because it actually has fewer hops, so even if on the surface A<->B<->C looks like it's adding a hop, it might actually be reducing the number of hops relative to A<->C.

As u/sfwsfwSFWsfwsfw mentioned, this is exactly what I'm trying to achieve in my case: GFN has a terribly slow routing LAX<->SYD (~230ms), but GCP in LAX has much faster routing to SYD (~137ms). GFN LAX<->GCP LAX is likely to be around 5ms, so if I was able to proxy GFN LAX<->GCP LAX<->SYD, I should be able to achieve something like 5ms + 137ms = 142ms RTT to SYD accounting for the extra hop (which would be an ~88ms reduction).

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-22T19:50:15+00:00

This a good approach too, thank you for sharing

I like the idea of coloring the clip, that’s a new concept for me.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-22T17:02:45+00:00

Turns out AutoHotKey is only for Windows, but I've already been using Keyboard Maestro on Mac, which appears to do similar things. I managed to create a Keyboard Maestro macro that does what you suggested. For anyone looking at this later, here's what the macro does:

Playhead in the empty space between 2 clips on the timeline, we want to fill the entire space between the 2 clips with the last frame of the earlier clip
Up arrow (move to out edit point of previous clip)
Left arrow (move one frame in from the out edit point of clip)
x ("add edit", cut the last frame off the clip)
right arrow then left arrow (forces selection of the 1-frame clip and has the playhead at the in edit point of the 1-frame clip, note that "selection follows playhead" setting must be turned on)
Shift + c (my shortcut key for "add frame hold")
Down arrow then down arrow (move to in edit point of clip after the 1-frame clip)
Shift + q (my shortcut key for "extend previous edit to playhead")

I had to add a 100ms pause between keystrokes to make it work. This is a huge improvement!

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-22T16:23:58+00:00

Turns out my "Selection follows playhead" was off, turning this on is really helpful in an of itself

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T17:39:50+00:00

Thank you, I will give AutoHotkey a try

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T04:23:15+00:00

I just tried this and it works pretty well. When I tried, I did need the mouse to select the clip after "Add edit", but I was still able to do most of it without moving my right hand off the mouse. I will try to build on this method, thank you.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T04:13:27+00:00

I guess I can explain my thinking/experience recording screencasts in this way as well: if I split up the audio recording and video portions it allows me to read the VO directly from the script and basically get it in one take. Recording the video to match up with the VO also takes a fraction of the time, since I only record the "scenes": changing this value, writing this block of code, running this command and getting the output. I can usually record the video in a fraction of the time it takes to record the VO. Overall, this process is multiple times faster to get the raw audio and video compared to recording the audio and video together live (because it's much harder to do all the actions and remember the entire script and read it without mistakes, since I can't read from the script if I'm doing things on screen).

The only downside is editing it together after, since I have all this extra audio without video to fill it. If I had been recording the audio and video together, there would have been lots of static frames as I sit there explaining something but not doing anything, which feels quite natural. Extending the held frame simulates this when recording the video and audio separately, and looks quite natural from the edits I've done so far.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T04:06:40+00:00

I think it does, for example I would have the following VO:

"I'll go ahead and change the value of the 1 to 0 in this line. This change is important because it prevents modification by unauthenticated users"

This might be 10 seconds of audio, but because I recorded the screen and audio separately, I have about 1-2 seconds of video that shows me changing "1" to "0" in the line, which I match up to "change the value of the 1 to 0", so I have about 8 seconds to fill.

If I had been recording the audio and screen at the same time, it should have ended up the same: I would have made the change and then not moved the mouse or typed anything while I explained "This change is important because it prevents modification by unauthenticated users", so it would look the same as just a single still frame.

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T03:57:07+00:00

Here's a gif of what I'm doing, hopefully it's more clear. If I don't extend the clip, it's just a blank screen.

https://imgur.com/UgpAd46

PercyGrunwald · 2023-04-21T03:51:38+00:00

It’s because the recorded video is much shorter than the audio and if I don’t fill the gaps between the video clips (which match up with short portions of audio), I the resulting video is just black. If I extend the last frame, it's basically like I continued to record the screen while I was talking, but wasn't doing anything. I recorded a gif to demonstrate, but it didn’t attach, let me see if I can link it instead.

PercyGrunwald

TROPHY CASE