Thumbnail Wishes

[nony]

1) Create all thumbnails in a folder : Currently it only generates the thumbnails of visible area at once. I wish XY could generate all the thumbnails while i am waiting.

2) Single Cache for all thumbnails : Currently it would generate file for each cached folder. If it's possible could you just bind all the thumbnail cache to a single folder.

3) Compression : I like the way XNView caches the thumbnails. It allows to compress the cache. It would be great to have this compression. Maybe some free database for VB like SQlite for C could come in handy

4) Display Bug: While XY is generating thumbnails if I quicky scroll the list down and again quickly scroll the list up then it would skip the thumbnail generation for files whose thumbnails wasn't created.

sshot-20.png

[j_c_hallgren]

1) Create all thumbnails in a folder : Currently it only generates the thumbnails of visible area at once. I wish XY could generate all the thumbnails while i am waiting.

This is the way it used to work but most felt that having to wait for thumbs to be created for files that may never be seen wasn't ideal for performance so now it does it only when viewed...this really improved speed for many of us.

And as to #2 (single cache): I suspect the reason it's the way it is now is due to performance reasons but Don knows for sure.

[admin]

1) Create all thumbnails in a folder : Currently it only generates the thumbnails of visible area at once. I wish XY could generate all the thumbnails while i am waiting.

2) Single Cache for all thumbnails : Currently it would generate file for each cached folder. If it's possible could you just bind all the thumbnail cache to a single folder.

3) Compression : I like the way XNView caches the thumbnails. It allows to compress the cache. It would be great to have this compression. Maybe some free database for VB like SQlite for C could come in handy

4) Display Bug: While XY is generating thumbnails if I quicky scroll the list down and again quickly scroll the list up then it would skip the thumbnail generation for files whose thumbnails wasn't created.

1) is planned as a special command or option
2) performance
3) performance
4) cannot reproduce; once I can I'll fix it

[nony]

It looks like the thumbnail making thread skips the thumbnail creation similarly to the older thumbnail bug. It is happening everytime

[admin]

It looks like the thumbnail making thread skips the thumbnail creation similarly to the older thumbnail bug. It is happening everytime

Maybe I can repro it on my next system... (win7/64)... patience...

[nony]

Ok. I will surely have patience. If some of the users could have patience for years for that old thumbnail bug, I hope, I will not have to wait that long

[lukescammell]

Please excuse my lack of knowledge abut VB6 and programming in general, but...

1) Couldn't this be offloaded to a separate processor core and therefore not kill performance while it's happening in the background? 1 Core handles the UI and one the processes like thumbnailing, checking for descendant directories, searching etc?

[admin]

Please excuse my lack of knowledge abut VB6 and programming in general, but...

1) Couldn't this be offloaded to a separate processor core and therefore not kill performance while it's happening in the background? 1 Core handles the UI and one the processes like thumbnailing, checking for descendant directories, searching etc?

In theory yes, but a couple of things have higher prio.

[lukescammell]

Oh, cool I understand the higher priority thing, but when you do get around to it, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom has a very cool way of displaying active processes which are going on in the background while you continue to work on stuff. File copy would be another great one to kick off to another thread/CPU.

LR is a highly threaded app that will happily use at least 4 cores and as much RAM as you'll let it in order to chuck multi-megapixel image files around at a terrific speed. While I don't expect XY to be as threaded as LR (it doesn't need to be as it's MUCH lighter on the system) the way LR generally behaves is really nice and could be imitated in a lot of other apps (Adobe themselves could learn a lot from it for the majority of their Creative Suite). Check out the demo to see what I mean and start non-destructively editing some RAW files or large JPEGs. http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/

[nony]

I see you have implemented create all thumbnails on another user's request. Thanks for that.

But I'm having some problems.

1) I have many pictures in a folder and some more in sub-folders. Now even though it has created thumbnails, on browsing some sub-folder and coming back to original folder, it again starts building thumbnails. I have selected to cache thumbnails. Is it actually loading the database?

2) While it's busy to create thumbnails for main folder entering the sub folder doesn't create any thumbnail for this folder unless I refresh the list.

Also the thumbnail creation is a lot slower than explorer even with Superfast thumbnails.

BTW my images folder is large more than a GB.


P.S. Happy New Year to all. Wishing a peaceful year for all.

[admin]

Also the thumbnail creation is a lot slower than explorer even with Superfast thumbnails.

No, it's just organized differently. I'm using the same system functions as Explorer so XY cannot be slower. Explorer works on a background thread and/or on-demand (not sure exactly). When you turn off XY's on-demand modus (by turning on "All thumbs at once") you lose the snappiness. You cannot have two things at the same time.

Conc. your other issues, I'll check that...

[nony]

Another thing I would like to add is to reduce the buffer space around the image thumbnail. Due to current limitation even on using small thumbnail dimensions, I'm not able to see more than four thumbnails at once in a row. There's is lot's of wasted space as shown in the screenshot.

[admin]

Another thing I would like to add is to reduce the buffer space around the image thumbnail. Due to current limitation even on using small thumbnail dimensions, I'm not able to see more than four thumbnails at once in a row. There's is lot's of wasted space as shown in the screenshot.

Currently hardcoded to 120 pixels. To guarantee that at least a good part of the captions is shown. Don't you need the captions?

[nony]

I think thumbnail mode can be managed even without captions. Or maybe shrink them to whatever the size of the image is. But don't hardcode it to fixed value. Or maybe make it flexible to whatever user want. Thumbnails without captions won't be a bad idea.

[admin]

I think thumbnail mode can be managed even without captions. Or maybe shrink them to whatever the size of the image is. But don't hardcode it to fixed value. Or maybe make it flexible to whatever user want. Thumbnails without captions won't be a bad idea.

I made it flexible.

Thumbnails without captions... yes, could be nice...