Large Tiles Larger?

[admin]

64x64 is not really large nowadays. What if I'd simply made it 128 x 128?

[Filehero]

64x64 is not really large nowadays. What if I'd simply made it 128 x 128?

Thumbs up. I wouldn't even mind 256x256.

Cheers,
Filehero

[j_c_hallgren]

64x64 is not really large nowadays. What if I'd simply made it 128 x 128?

Really depends on what size/resolution screen one has to view it on -- now I use that view option only occasionally but in my typical use, I can only see 12 files with existing Large Tiles so making it much bigger would render it less than useful due to how many files I could see at once -- if desired size can be set somewhere, then fine, but if not, please NO.

[PeterH]

-- if desired size can be set somewhere, then

I think, with display sizes nowadays between VGA and UHD , such values really have to be settable.

[Stef123]

I think, with display sizes nowadays between VGA and UHD , such values really have to be settable.

+1+1+1+1+1
Not to mention FUHD and QUHD.
More and more notebooks flaunt UHD nowadays, and if this seems far-fetched - take your digital camera and view your pics on such a screen - you'll never go below UHD again. It's crystal sharp, editing becomes fine-tuning the most minute details...

With XY hooking up to cameras pretty soon (from what I heard on the grapevine) - it makes sense IMO to also cater to higher resolutions. The bigger Plus-signs in the tree were a good start. What still suffers most are the tiny CTB dropdown menus

[Jeff Bellune]

+1 for larger Large Tiles.

Jeff

[klownboy]

Yes, a big +1 for larger tiles at least 128x128. I'll have to update my Thumbnail Maintenance script but that's not a problem.

[bdeshi]

Hey, dont forget us smallscreeners!
Make the size configurable, at least a toggle between two/three sizes.

[admin]

OK, I will change the factory defaults to 48 and 128, and make them tweakable (minimum values 48 and 64).

Is it okay to always have them as perfect squares?

[j_c_hallgren]

OK, I will change the factory defaults to 48 and 128, and make them tweakable (minimum values 48 and 64).

Good to hear about tweak for us with limited screen space!

Is it okay to always have them as perfect squares?

For my 4x3 layout display, square makes sense -but- maybe for 16x9 style, a rectangle may be better to use less vertical space and the extra horizontal?

[Filehero]

For my 4x3 layout display, square makes sense -but- maybe for 16x9 style, a rectangle may be better to use less vertical space and the extra horizontal?

Yes, good idea, thanks for bringing it up.
@Don: could the original aspect ratio be "easily" preserved?


Cheers,
Filehero

[admin]

Original aspect ratio of each image? Well, all tiles have to have the same aspect ratio, so this won't really make much sense, or?

[Filehero]

Well, all tiles have to have the same aspect ratio, so this won't really make much sense, or?

There was a faint hope for differential display ... can someone delete my question?

[admin]

[sfwood]

Not quite what you asked, and maybe not something you're very interested in spending time on, but--
I hope that at some point XY will get infinitely variable (within a fixed range) thumbnail & tile sizing controlled by a toolbar slider and/or other appropriate means. This is a common and handy feature in file browsers more focused on image browsing, but still would be useful in XY.