Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Shrink images before download #429

Closed
netAction opened this issue Mar 9, 2014 · 16 comments
Closed

Shrink images before download #429

netAction opened this issue Mar 9, 2014 · 16 comments

Comments

@netAction
Copy link

Could the app please download images in a nice size?

At the moment (1.5.4) it comsumes Megabytes of traffic.

I understand some people need the original image or want to zoom as much as possible.

@Nowaker
Copy link

Nowaker commented May 5, 2014

This could be an interesting option, but it need to be off by default.

@davivel
Copy link
Contributor

davivel commented May 22, 2014

@netAction , could you describe a bit more the situation? Would you like to quickly browse a set of pictures, and then click any of them to view full size? Don't you ever need full size?

Maybe this fits in some way with the thumbnais API in the server side, but that feature has no ETA time yet, if I'm not wrong.

Let's keep the discussion open, of course.

Any other opinion here? @jancborchardt ?

@netAction
Copy link
Author

Would you like to quickly browse a set of pictures

Yes of course. The lack of thumbnails is so obvious, I didn't mention it.

But what I mean is a shrink to about 300-700kB in full size. The full size download option is good and important, but the simple full screen gallery viewer should not download 18 megapixel images.

@davivel
Copy link
Contributor

davivel commented May 22, 2014

And how should we calculate the right weight for any kind of users with any kind screen sizes and densities?

Sorry, I see your point, but I hardly can think in this feature as something with a high priority. Besides, this is not something any client app can solve itself. The conversion of the images should be done in the server.

@netAction
Copy link
Author

Good point. A JPG of 1800x1800 maximum will fit most times. This is how G+, Facebook and Twitter do it. This will be too large on many devices. Full ack. But any larger image will be even more too large.

Of course it should be done on server side.

@Nowaker
Copy link

Nowaker commented May 22, 2014

It won't, 2560x1440 are getting more and more popular. I already have one.

@netAction
Copy link
Author

Please scale some of your images to 1800x1800 @ 500kB and compare on your screen if it's worth waiting or you simply don't see any difference.

@jancborchardt
Copy link
Member

I agree that if anything, it should be a setting on the app like »Download only shrinked images« (or better wording).

Also yeah, thumbnails are an important point. The issue for that is #317

@netAction
Copy link
Author

I think the download of shrinked images is not more than nice-to-have.
But the time and traffic the gallery view wastes at the moment is a real bug.

@Nowaker
Copy link

Nowaker commented May 23, 2014

@netAction Assuming that by 1800x1800 you mean 1800 for the bigger dimension, then:

  1. Some images are rather OK (those 4:3), some are not (those wide-screen). (1,1 MB size) We should aim for ~2500 bigger dimension these days
  2. I can't spot a difference between 1,1MB size (Q=98) vs 500 KB size (Q=90).

However, I missed one important thing - it's an Android issue, not the image gallery in the webapp. ;) Sorry for the confusion I may have caused.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices max bigger dimension is 1920, so 1800x1800 should be fine (or better 1920x1920).

@netAction
Copy link
Author

I have a good Internet connection and a large screen on my Android device myself. And I often zoom in. So I agree, an optional high resolution version might be nice. Maybe the app could detect the bandwith itself or simply add an HD button.

All these things can be discussed later. At the moment there is a gallery that is hardly usable for high quality images and anything coming directly out of camera.

@jancborchardt
Copy link
Member

Interesting idea, but it gets clunky once you really want to view the images properly. This is mainly an issue when it comes to high-end photography so at the moment it can’t be something we can focus on. We’ll keep it open of course but hope you understand we have to focus on more basic things first.

@netAction
Copy link
Author

I understand in high-end photography it comes to images with great resolutions that are much too large for a slider gallery on an average bandwidth.

@tobiasKaminsky
Copy link
Contributor

I would do this:
Clicking on an image in file list --> "downloads" smaller (resolution is to be discussed) image in cache.
This is sufficient for viewing, sharing via Whatsapp, put on Facebook, ...
long-press -> download:
--> Complete image is really downloaded and stored.
Used for: image manipulation, zooming in, sharing via Email, ...

@netAction
Copy link
Author

+1
And the same download option directly in the full screen sliding gallery would be great.

@davivel
Copy link
Contributor

davivel commented Nov 18, 2014

Let me redirect this issue to #714, since the proposal there is getting more compelte.

@davivel davivel closed this as completed Nov 18, 2014
@jesmrec jesmrec removed the Image label Mar 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants