Mainnet Issue with Minted/Bought Token Factory NFT vs. Opensea about protocol HOT 14 CLOSED

also we've noticed that the token id is very long compared to an nft minted to an "old" collection, assuming this is a function of how the token factory is using beacon proxies? is there a way to check how this may impact opensea or other site's ability to render?

from protocol.

here is the ipfs JSON metadata:

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmYqvdhGhQLP34gHqJtTMfzFHQiwQ9ZgYpUn3LSYsKMWdY

{"name":"Cybergoat #37","description":"","image":"ipfs//ipfs/QmcqvrocHZfydEjLg4uCn3XSgFEQsY2BvBNPNrJQfxn3bp","external_url":"ht**ps://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867393","attributes":[]}

from protocol.

checked via check my nft:

https://checkmynft.com/?address=0x957144608480ab2c964afe8ba3388b0bfdac8811&id=23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867393

says:

Error: Could not fetch token URI. This token likely uses a non-standard metadata set-up. Review the “Read Contract” fields in Etherscan to see which fields relate to the token metadata (i.e. look for fields such as tokenIPFShash, getArweaveImgHash, or other similar fields).

Read this token’s contract here.

from protocol.

This was addressed a bit during the dev call. A fix for this is being worked on. Basically data isn't being passed when the item is minted.

from protocol.

Adding more info as i'm investigating, was able to recreate our issue in rinkeby whereby i have an NFT which shows on rinkeby.rarible but does not render correctly on testnets.opensea (after it has been fully minted on chain).

An example can be found here:

https://rinkeby.rarible.com/token/0xae87ce8ba634b32b59e31aa661b311896bc0ec49:3939678908558661877700378542264120479129353372516953395555235114166104621064?tab=details

https://testnets.opensea.io/assets/0xae87ce8ba634b32b59e31aa661b311896bc0ec49/3939678908558661877700378542264120479129353372516953395555235114166104621064

In comparison, a cocoNFT NFT here:

https://rinkeby.rarible.com/token/0x7a7e360eae64bf8573eb9bacb110a5ab32042d0c:75731138102015961357184755712147122383832010243605911511434948230543929507857?tab=history

https://testnets.opensea.io/assets/0x7a7e360eae64bf8573eb9bacb110a5ab32042d0c/75731138102015961357184755712147122383832010243605911511434948230543929507857

Thank you!

from protocol.

just noticed one difference, looks like cocoNFT is using the ERC1155 token factory whereas we are using the ERC721 one. But not sure that should make a difference?

coconft rinkeby collection contract
https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/address/0x7a7e360eae64bf8573eb9bacb110a5ab32042d0c

one2all rinkeby test collection contract
https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/address/0xae87ce8ba634b32b59e31aa661b311896bc0ec49

from protocol.

Just did a test with an ERC1155 token factory contract as wel to check. and yes this is looking like some user error somewhere.

ERC1155 NFT showing same behavior. Shows on Rarible but not Opensea:

https://rinkeby.rarible.com/token/0xf6a51a8aa638af9a0a0a9da4bf31597b90f76882:3939678908558661877700378542264120479129353372516953395555235114166104621057?tab=history

https://testnets.opensea.io/assets/0xf6a51a8aa638af9a0a0a9da4bf31597b90f76882/3939678908558661877700378542264120479129353372516953395555235114166104621057

going back to square one can someone please verify whether i am inputting the token factory inputs correctly? copied here:

from protocol.

Believe i have found the issue. Our metadata was not being constructed properly and was missing the token id after the colon in external URI. closing this issue for now!!

recent IPFS for reference
{"name":"One 2 All Non Factory Test #2","description":"test test","image":"ipfs//ipfs/QmXttKz61H9qV6CbW3jVFb9i2cwJHGqZaG3MqmJi9aBSnp","external_url":"https://rinkeby.rarible.com/token/0x6ede7f3c26975aad32a475e1021d8f6f39c89d82:","attributes":[]}

old IPFS that worked:
{"name":"Blind Monkeys","yes this is the description!":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/bafybeif5lulji5db46tetab3x56gjscip75ukc7vlb5z7zeafrnfogqz5i","external_url":"https://rinkeby.rarible.com/token/0x509fd4cdaa29be7b1fad251d8ea0fca2ca91eb60:18","attributes":[]}

from protocol.

Reopening this.

We are having a similar issue...

Links:

• Rarible
• OpenSea
• CheckMyNFT
• Metadata

You can view the Metadata. Our external_url doesn't link back to URL, but links back to our external site (which is still acceptable). This issue is intermittent for us. So I can't exactly tell what is going on and if this is an OpenSea issue or something wrong with Rarible protocol, Metadata, etc.

from protocol.

We came across this as well recently. This seems to be different issue from prior in that prior syntax issues have been fixed and now we have metadata that is more or less identical being rendered differently on Opensea. One renders correctly and other is showing collection cover as main image.

#38 (misrendered on OS):

https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867407?tab=details

{"name":"Cybergoat #38","description":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/QmYycTSBoi475GVDdgRYLE6BFz9EwG2KEdxFV1tCzxyYw5","external_url":"https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867407","attributes":[]}

https://opensea.io/assets/0x957144608480ab2c964afe8ba3388b0bfdac8811/23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867407

#40 (rendered correctly on OS):

https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867410?tab=details

{"name":"Cybergoat #40","description":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/QmSxHDYqoxwSGsKqY2U5x4aCfd1w7i3cXTBXLBvsr7cUCt","external_url":"https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867410","attributes":[]}

https://opensea.io/assets/0x957144608480ab2c964afe8ba3388b0bfdac8811/23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867410

from protocol.

adding some more datapoints. we have the metadata for an NFT minted via the new rarible.com lazy mint option. Only difference between that metadata and O2A and CocoNFT metadata is use of a folder structure within IPFS and direct reference to an image file. Is this a more surefire way to load and retrieve assets?

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmRpX9qdpHYsTj5NETxyRZGgSQ3Ajtd3HjjV7cXAYnEYtw
{"name":"Cybergoat #60","description":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/QmeN6B68UNCNwUUZARKzk4UWK3eRaS4fTVkMZBkDox59qM/image.jpeg","external_url":"https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afe8ba3388b0bfdac8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867430%22,%22attributes%22:[]%7D
so this is interesting. they use folders so looks like they load image as "image.jpeg" into a folder within ipfs
the rest looks consistent with what we used
{"name":"Cybergoat #40","description":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/QmSxHDYqoxwSGsKqY2U5x4aCfd1w7i3cXTBXLBvsr7cUCt","external_url":"https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867410%22,%22attributes%22:[]%7D

{"name":"Cybergoat #38","description":"","image":"ipfs://ipfs/QmYycTSBoi475GVDdgRYLE6BFz9EwG2KEdxFV1tCzxyYw5","external_url":"https://rarible.com/token/0x957144608480ab2c964afE8ba3388B0BfdAc8811:23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867407%22,%22attributes%22:[]%7D
yep that's the only difference i can see off the bat
so cocoNFT also uses a direct link rather than folder structure... maybe it has something to do with that...

{"name":"Susana Horia","description":"Susana Horia","image":"https://gateway.pinata.cloud/ipfs/QmQ68BJJXrmRJFpsBgN4T5vbBEcXRefCoRhU8cy57AyfBa%22,%22external_url%22:%22https://coconft.com/p/MHgzZGViNzAxYjdmMTU3Zjk1ZjcyZmIxZmNlYWQ3YTMyNDhhNTA1NDllOjg2ODE3NDM3OTgwMDY5NzYzMzEzNTQxNzA5MTQ3NjkzOTg1NDYzMjEzMTkyOTMyMTM0OTgwNzYxNDI3MTk4Mjg3NTM0MzIwNzc5MjY1%22,%22attributes%22:[%7B%22trait_type%22:%22Creator%27s Handle","value":"paper_misfits"},{"trait_type":"Permalink","value":"https://www.instagram.com/p/xKUOuyAoNu/%22%7D,%7B%22trait_type%22:%22Created Date","value":"2014-12-28T18:54:31+0000"},{"trait_type":"Platform","value":"Instagram"},{"trait_type":"Media Type","value":"IMAGE"},{"trait_type":"Platform Media ID","value":"17842161682042160"}]}

from protocol.

alright this is crazy but the OS page is now rendering correctly? This def seems to be an issue on OS side. What the heck?!

https://opensea.io/assets/0x957144608480ab2c964afe8ba3388b0bfdac8811/23203816277389531492177214940942028241142347653428038063978490842244439867407

from protocol.

We actually chatted with the OpenSea team earlier today. They mentioned they do the avatar/collection image as the main image for a placeholder when their indexer is still pulling the metadata. They recommend to "refresh" the metadata using the little toolbar on the top right, but that it'll eventually render correctly on OpenSea.

So this issue could potentially be closed again.

from protocol.

good to know! alright closing again... for now

from protocol.