XYplorer Beta Club

Any plans for the low end of quality, for us portable users on the road and our need for speed?
http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic. ... 15#p116718

Stef123 wrote:Any plans for the low end of quality, for us portable users on the road and our need for speed?
http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic. ... 15#p116718

For speed, use the "Fast" quality -- it will use embedded thumbnails if there are any. This really speeds it up.

admin wrote:For speed, use the "Fast" quality

Been using "Fast" all along, of course. What I meant is raising "Fast" a notch or two, in terms of speed, at the expense of quality, hence my allusion to the "lower end" of your current improvements.

When you browse folders in thumbs view, what you really care about is speed, to get an overivew as fast as possible. Browsing is the keyword here, not comparing or identifying. When it comes to browsing, XY lags behind other tools, it takes 3x longer to see the same size thumbs.

OK, that's not something I like to hear. XY should be always the fastest. This is rule number one. I'll make a note...

That's the spirit.

Stef123 wrote:When it comes to browsing, XY lags behind other tools, it takes 3x longer to see the same size thumbs.

I think XY is fast enough, but it's the old problem of "XY is written in the better VB". Most apps nowadays certainly use separate concurrent threads to get/generate thumbnails and such stuff.

SammaySarkar wrote:... but it's the old problem of "XY is written in the better VB". ...

Naughty, naughty

SammaySarkar wrote:I think XY is fast enough

Debatable. Fast enough if you have small folders and if you never compare it to other tools which are at least 3x faster. Waiting 20 sec is bad enough, but waiting 1 whole minute over-extends my patience when browsing foreign machines. Ken's Thumbnail Cache script is a real boon here. I use it whenever I can to generate the cache beforehand, of the whole enchilada - and then XY beats every other tool

Don't know about "better VB" - whether you're being sarcastic or serious? I've come across quite some aversion towards VB, seems it's got a a very bad reputation among the tech staff. Maybe due to the uncertain future I read about somewhere here in the forum?

better VB: regardless of other opinions, VB is Visual "BASIC", and VB6 and earlier were more BASIC than vb.net. vb.net is more like a C# ide made to look like basic. imo.

Filehero wrote:Very good decision to get yourself a Fuji X.

Yep. But I cannot see RAF thumbnails and can't seem to find a CODEC at Fuji or anywhere else. Got a tip?

Hey Don, I get thumbnails for my X100S. I thought you had FastPictureCodecPack installed? That should give you thumbnails. Are you sure you have "Fugi RAF" checked off in the FastPictureCodecPack Control Panel applet?

It's a weird thing: The FastPictureCodecPack does not work anymore for me. Since almost a year ago. When it's installed XY goes down immediately when only selecting a JPG (even in no-thumbs view). Believe me, I tried everything, even talked to their support and sent crash dumps. No avail. I'm apparently the only the person in the world with this issue.

So, since RAF is the only thing I need I was expecting that Fuji gives me a codec for having bought their expensive camera. But I cannot find it.

admin wrote:It's a weird thing: The FastPictureCodecPack ....

Which is my recommendation as well.

admin wrote:So, since RAF is the only thing I need I was expecting that Fuji gives me a codec for having bought their expensive camera. But I cannot find it.

What does their support say? Does Fuji provide their own converter (as, for example, Olympus does/did)? Installing it should co-install the RAF codec I suppose.

Yes, they offer one, but it's 256 MB which I find a bit suspicious...

admin wrote:Yes, they offer one, but it's 256 MB which I find a bit suspicious...

LR has already reached 1.x GB.
VM?