Problem in displaying NFT on pool.pm after minting

Developers Native Tokens
, ,
21

Finally realized that $tokenname variable and the metadata are different and adjusted accordingly. Thanks for the nudge @Alexd1985 and the help from @Couder. Glad to hear that you are suggesting an update @Couder. Very much appreciated everyone!

1 Like
22

I was going through that tutorial myself.

Is it even correct that the token name in the transaction build command has to be base16 encoded? I did it the first time and it didn’t work. After burning the first try, I have built the transaction with the token name in clear and it worked. (It was the cardano-cli coming with Daedalus, so version 1.30.1. Perhaps a change in recent versions?)

(BTW: I don’t like the tutorial style with all these variables. It leads to a lot of people fighting bash instead of understanding what goes where.)

EDIT: I just read you pull request and I definitely second that. The tutorial states at the beginning of Minting Native Assets | Cardano Developer Portal that it was written with 1.27.0 and then they half-changed it to meet 1.31.0, but it goes wrong, when I try it with 1.30.1? Aaargh!

23

Hi!

The base16 token name is required from version 1.31.0.

Good point about the Minting Native Assets | Cardano Developer Portal tutorial (that is different from Minting NFTs | Cardano Developer Portal).

I’ll get more familiar with this tutorial and eventually create new pull request.

Martin from CBROS

1 Like
24

They are neighbouring chapters that seem to have been written together back in the days. There are some back references from the NFT chapter to the native asset chapter. The native asset chapter shows a metadata.json in its tree that never gets created, there, but is only later done for the NFT. …

But they seem to have updated them inconsistently since then. For native assets they still compute the fees and the output manually using protocol.json, for NFTs they use a newer (?) method involving --change-address that does not need this computation and the protocol.json (but they still download it unnecessarily).

Probably, I should do a larger PR on both of them?

25

Hi Smaug and all

Can you or anyone else help please?

I keep getting this issue where the NFTs created don’t appear on Pool.pm (or Nami). Everything looks great and I am doing loads of tests - but some some reason sometimes the NFT appears on Pool.pm pretty quick, on others it can take weeks etc. The last lot of tests NFTs I create was on 23rd Feb 2022, but they are yet to load on Pool (Asset: asset1lxvjmt9we8s2rnnzgm678ptmheqt30y0cz6f5v / TX: a802a477fe457bb65d69ec6d00c3bbbaa68367a5ca9115b597f082c20bcb5caa ).

Below is a sample of the Metadata for one of the NFTs created (7 NFTs in total were created on the same policy ID at that time - Policy ID: 8c9aa6cbe6b777b570526f5117212371191e4d525835f47df5f25b85, and more have been created in the past - and as you can see the older ones do show, but as mentioned some took a very long time to load).

NB - the NFT is created under Label 721 (and have a royalty attached, created on a previous date when different NFTs were created).

NFT not showing on Pool (or Nami, or IPFS) →

Dog1-DogEatsBanana-TEST": {

  •     Collection: "N/A Testing minting Large NFTs on the same Policy with Royalties",*

  •     "Copyright 1": "Copyright ©. All Right Reserved by Bob Lawerg (artist known as)",*

  •     "Copyright 2": "No buyer or market is allowed to make derivatives of my designs",*

  •     "Created on": "Cardano Fanboy Minter",*

  •     "Description 1 ": "Dog 1 - Dog Eats Banana",*

  •     "Description 2 - Purpose": "TEST - Dog 1 - 5.1mb",*

  •     Instagram: "cryptobylawerg",*

  •     Name: "Dog 1 - Dog Eats Banana - TEST",*

  •     Pinterest: "cryptobylawerg",*

  •     Twitter: "cryptolawerg",*

  •     Website: "www.lawerg.com",*

  •     image: "ipfs://QmT9gG3Vj3qNusi5pgus2hS1ivRKX3mHEGxh1NxiWJGgq7"*

TBH - I think the issue is with the NFT being uploaded to IPFS, but I don’t really know what the issue could be as I have uploaded much larger files in the past →

Any and all advice, suggestions and solutions would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

26

How do you “upload” to IPFS?

Do you pin the NFTs with a pinning service? Or do you pin them on your own server that is accessible 24/7?

If you just put them in a local IPFS instance, they are, of course, unavailable once you turn off that local computer or just stop the IPFS service/daemon.

27

It looks like your files have some trouble to be available on the IPFS network and as @HeptaSean said, it is likely due to the node you use to add your files to IPFS.

This often happens when people run their own node intermittently, without good connections to the network, and sometimes without the appropriate firewall rules in addition.

If you use your own node, I would advise to also upload your files for free to https://nft.storage. This will offer redundant pinning and likely solve your issues too.

2 Likes
28

Hi @Smaug and @HeptaSean

Apologies for not replying sooner (to long to explain why, but sorry I could not reply sooner).

Thank you so much for your replies and assistance. I think what you have identified and suggested will (hopefully do the trick).

To answer your question @HeptaSean, Blockfrost and a private server were both being used (at different times) but I need to get a few things checked out and maybe reconfigured etc. @Smaug - thank you for the link, I am sure it will be very useful.

Once again thank you for your help and for taking the time to reply. :smiley:

29

Hi @Smaug
My apologies for necro posting, I thought my question might help someone in the future within this thread. I have only made a brief research for 10-15 minutes by now and couldn’t find anything but here.

So, I have an asset pool.pm which used to appear in pool.pm as an asset with a corresponding image. Later I added it to git repo cardano-token-registry to make it a little more legit. I registered it with the name, description and a logo. Some time later (around this winter) the assets stopped displaying the actual image behind and started showing the logo correlated with the cardano-token-registry.

Q: Is it possible, that pool.pm is favouring the logo from cardano-token-registry before the image linked in the “image” field of the metadata. If so, is this expected? If so, can this be avoided?

I have checked my metadata in poom.pm validator and it looks good (and it used to look good back when I just minted it)

Thank you very much for reading this!

2 Likes
30

Sorry for the very long delay.

Yes pool.pm is currently using the Cardano Token Registry in priority, because it can still be updated even once the policy is locked, which in some cases is needed by tokens to provide up to date information.

If you remove the optional logo property from the registry, it will use the image from 721 metadata if any. But I believe the maximum image size in the registry has increased and now allows to use an high enough resolution for typical fungible tokens needs.