ah, I get it I think. You were trying to see if we could fix things while still keeping only square thumbnails?
On 24 January 2017 at 08:29, Attila Tajti <[email protected]> wrote: > I was wondering if there is a good use case where square thumbnails are > needed in the first place. They are easy to work with and I liked iPhoto > and Photofloat that used them, but I agree something like the web UI would > be far superior. > > > On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 1:05:56 AM UTC+1, mpl wrote: >> >> wait, why do we need anything new on the server-side, since the web UI is >> already capable of doing this job pretty well? Why can't the publisher code >> be improved to do the same thing the web UI does? What am I missing? >> >> >> On 20 January 2017 at 08:47, Attila Tajti <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 at 2:01:52 AM UTC+1, mpl wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 17 January 2017 at 18:28, Attila Tajti <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Btw, the thumbnails in the publisher show up with an incorrect aspect >>>>> ratio (apparently the image is streched into a square shape) but >>>>> standalone >>>>> images appear fine. Is there anything I can do about it? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yeah, I did the very minimum amount of math for the thumbs. >>>> You can: >>>> 1) as usual file an issue :-) (but that probably won't be in my >>>> priorities, sorry) >>>> 2) fix the code at app/publisher/js/members.go. Aaron had done it >>>> pretty well for the web UI (I'm still seeing some bugs if I mix images with >>>> very different sizes though), so that might be the way to go for >>>> inspiration. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> For square thumbnails to work thumbnail images are needed with proper >>> size (i.e. cropped to 200x200px), perhaps with new query parameters cw and >>> ch (crop width/height) on the server. >>> >>> The cropping could alternatively be done in the browser, but then an >>> image should be proportionally scaled so that (width >= 200px && height >= >>> 200px && (height == 200px || width == 200px)). Then the server would need >>> store bits of the image that are never shown, therefore it would be better >>> to have it cropped on the server side >>> >>> The handler would scale the image until either (scaledwidth == cw && >>> scaledheight >= ch) or (scaledheight == ch || scaledwidth >= cw) is true, >>> crop the top/bottom or left/right sides of it so that the thumb will have >>> the exact dimensions cw × ch. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Camlistore" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Camlistore" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Camlistore" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
