about to start a new gallery folder

[Lazur]

Some questions that came into my mind.


Is it possible to start a new folder without uploading anything a file to it?
Couldn't see such option, maybe I missed that.
#Edit: just found folders have to be created before uploading files, so the answer is yes#

Is it a good idea, to upload the same image twice, but with different sizes?
Made images with large dimensions for "technical" reasons -drawing in the scale of 1:100-,
and the original svg is way larger than what could be displayed right.

The main idea is to use the smaller version as a thumbnail/displaying in the forum,
and the original for sharing in the dimensions it was originally meant to be/printing purposes.

Anyway, what's "right", how are svg-s better to be uploaded?
Is there a preferred size?
Like images in the forum -at inkscapecommunity at least- are better around in 600 pixels in width.

If a gallery folder is started, is it all good to embed the images in the forum?
Here at IC and at IF as well?

How a work in progress topic is managing better images uploaded in a personal gallery folder?
 

[brynn]

Yes, you can create an album and not upload any images to  it yet.  User Tools > Create/Order My Albums > New Album.  (Here's a guide I wrote, if anyone needs it.)

I don't see anything wrong with uploading the same image, at different sizes.  But there are a couple of issues with SVGs.  One is there's a problem with the thumbnail display.  (Somehow it becomes cropped.  I'm hoping someone with the right skills will be able to fix the plugin http://forum.inkscapecommunity.com/index.php?topic=79.0.)   And also, clicking directly on the thumbnail does not display the image.  You have to click in the white space to the left or to the right of the thumbnail.

There is not a preferred size for any image, as far I'm concerned.  That is up to the artist, what size are their images. 

In considering what size to make my own images, if I want them to be fully displayed on the screen, I like to limit the height between 600 and 700 pixels, and width between 800 and 1200.  I guess most computer screens fall somewhere within those limits, so most people will be able to see the whole image, no matter what kind of screen they have.  However, with the advent and popularity of tablets these days, which seem to have generally smaller screens, it might be something to consider.

Yes, you can use the URL that the gallery creates, to embed the images elsewhere.  How to retrieve that URL can be a bit tricky.

If you'd like the actual gallery page to open, so that all the file info is available (the intermediate image), when someone clicks your link, here's how to get the right URL.  Open the intermediate page of the image (the page with all the file info).  (You may need to click the Hide/Display File Information button to display the info.)  Look through the file info, and copy the text to the right of "URL:".

But if you want only the image itself to be displayed, without the gallery, here's how to retrieve the proper URL (if anyone can't figure it out):

For PNGs, you must have the full size image opened.
     a)  In Firefox, right-click on the full size image > Copy Image Location
     b)  In IE, right-click on the full size image > Properties, then copy the Address (URL).
You'll know you copied the correct address if it ends in .png.

For SVGs, you can get the proper info from thumbs, intermediate, or full size image.
     a)  In Firefox, right-click > This Frame > View Frame Info, then copy the Address.
     b)  In IE, right-click > Properties, then copy the Address (URL).
You'll know you copied the correct address if it ends in .svg.

I don't understand what you're asking:  "How a work in progress topic is managing better images uploaded in a personal gallery folder?"

Are you asking how the gallery can be used to display works in progress, at different stages of the drawing?  I've had a couple of thoughts about that.

One is that images of the same drawing at different stages of completion, may or may not be of interest to all viewers.  Some people might find it quite helpful, beneficial or instructive to their own growth as an artist (or whatever profession or avocation).  Others might not find it interesting at all.  And some people might even think a WIP image is "ugly".  So it's up to you, the album owner, to make your best assessment, and decide what to do.  To me, I'm not concerned much with what others think about it.  If they don't like it, they don't have to look at it, lol. 

So for example, you could have an album for 1 single image, where you upload several to many WIPs, as the image progresses.  Or maybe you could have an album for all your WIPs.  Or of course, you don't have to use the IC gallery.  You could upload your WIPs to any image host, and insert the URL provided by that host, in the message.

Or another idea.  (Unless and until I find out about this privilege potentially being abused,) private albums can be created and maintained in the IC Gallery!  Then you could upload all your WIPs in a private album which only you can see.  Although......hhmmm..... if the album is private, I wonder if only the album owner could see the image??  I'll have to do a test on that.

Or maybe I misunderstood your question, lol??

[Lazur]

Testing the sizes of the svg displaying in the gallery.

The thumbnail size can be 128*128 pixels at it's fullness, larger sized images are cropped.
The full size version is 700*700 pixels for the original image, larger sizes are cropped.
The actual display size of it may differ based on how much you zoom in.

So for thumbnails 128*128 is preferred,
for screens with 1366*768 display size, 679 of height can be displayed without needing to scroll down.
With a 120% zooming in, only a 700*540 pixels part of the image is displayed, aligned to top left corner of the display box, the rest is cropped.

That is for the right displaying part.
Is it a good thing to upload svg's out of this 700*540 or 700*679 range, for download purposes?

Also would it be possible to add an open fullsize image in new tab function to the gallery?
Like if you want to upload screen wallpapers, it would be a bit disappointing if you could only look at a cropped part of it. 

#edit: found that raster images have that kind of feature, would be nice with svg-s too#

[Lazur]

...
I don't understand what you're asking:  "How a work in progress topic is managing better images uploaded in a personal gallery folder?"
...

How it would look more orgsanised.
If there is a gallery folder serving as a host only, with discussion only at the topic, and images embedded to there, or,
the topic without further discussion, and conversations going on the gallery page.


In addition to my previous post, with an svg uploaded in it's original size, far from being the optimal display size,
it would look less promising, to be downloaded.
And, it's a bit too complicated to get a share url from dropbox, another from this gallery, and embed it to a wip topic as

Code: [Select]

[url=dl.dropboxurl][svg]icimageurl[/svg][/url]

.

[Lazur]

Here is a template showing what part is cropped for the thumbnails -if they are cropped-,
what part of the image is displayed best without cropping -if they are cropped at the gallery-,
and what seems to fill the screen here in the forum at 125% zooming.


#edit: cleaned up some mess

[brynn]

Oh, I did not understand what you meant about preferred size.  Yes, the thumbnail size is 128² and the intermediate size is 700².  So to avoid the erroneous cropping of SVGs, you'll need to keep those sizes in mind.  And btw/fyi, the largest file size for all images is 30 mb, which is not necessarily a permanent limit.  I may raise or lower it in the future, if necessary.

I just did a quick test, to answer your question about the full size image in a new tab.  Apparently, that's another bug with the SVG plugin   :sadb: .  I can't seem to get a full size SVG displayed (if it's larger than 700² pixels) at all.

(For all other formats, just click on the intermediate image, and the full size pops up in a new window.  I tried Ctrl + click, but got a blank new tab.  So I guess new window is the only option.  However, I think there is a plug in which will allow browsing an album using keyboard controls.  If SVG full size (when larger than max) could be displayed, it would be worth testing to find out if that plug in allows browsing full size images via keyboard control.  But as it is, it doesn't seem worth testing.  Although I'd be glad to install that plugin, if anyone would like it.)

Also, my test SVG's thumbnail doesn't show up at all!  (See http://inkscapecommunity.com/ic_gallery/thumbnails.php?album=16, titled "test svg")  Apparently a 4th bug in that SVG plugin    .  Honestly, I think the author of that plugin does not know much about SVGs.

I've been on the fence about keeping the plugin, in it's current deprecated state.  But in hopes of someone with the right skills to overhaul it, finding us, and needing it, and being motivated to fix it, I'm keeping it on board for now.

Still need to digest  your last post, and I'll reply shortly 

[brynn]

#edit: so are svg-s supported by the gallery, but not by the forum?

Yes, SVGs allowed in all boards, both via inserting (embedding) and attachment.  Use IMG tags (this button ) instead of SVG tags.

[Lazur]

A-ha!
Browsing through chrome it's right clicking on thumbnail and view source of the frame, then
deleting the "view-source:" part brings to the full sized svg-s, that can be displayed between the img tags.

Here is yours:


Seems the thumbnail for that svg was cropped form the top left corner's 120/120 portion too, which is totally transparent.

[brynn]

In addition to my previous post, with an svg uploaded in it's original size, far from being the optimal display size,
it would look less promising, to be downloaded.

There are various ways that I could configure the gallery, so that all the thumbnails in an album all have the same width, or all the same height....or so that all the thumbnails have the same dimension.  This would make a more eye-pleasing display, in some ways.  However, in the case of PNGs (or any raster), it would result in pixelated images which must be stretched or shrunk, to fit a certain thumbnail size.   To my way of thinking, it would not only be deceptive (as to the true size of an image) the pixelation would be, well, to me it would be unacceptable.  So that's why I've configured the thumbnail size to be a reflection of the full size image.

Even though having different sized images in an album, results in a sort of jumbled appearance of the thumbnails, I think that is preferable to having thumbnails which do not represent the actual image, and more often than not, would be pixelated.  In a gallery which is meant to promote Inkscape, it doesn't make sense to impose size limitations.  For example, you may only upload images which are 500 x 400 px.  A photo gallery might be a different story 

So it is up to each album owner to arrange their images in different albums, so that each album has what they consider to be a pleasing appearance.  You can have more than 1 album, and find some way to group like-sized images.  You can also arrange the (order of) thumbnails within each album.  For people who use Inkscape to create artwork, it seems like each artist typically prefers to create images of similar sizes.  So their albums may have a more organized appearance than mine do.  In many ways, I'm still trying to develop my personal style artistically.  That's why some of my albums have all kinds of different sized thumbnails.  But they're my albums, and I don't feel bad about how they look (as far as thumbnail size).

...
I don't understand what you're asking:  "How a work in progress topic is managing better images uploaded in a personal gallery folder?"
...

How it would look more orgsanised.
If there is a gallery folder serving as a host only, with discussion only at the topic, and images embedded to there, or,
the topic without further discussion, and conversations going on the gallery page.

I created the WIP board for the purpose of holding discussions there.  Tips, comments, suggestions, etc. about wip images, should be requested and/or posted in topics in the WIP board.  I've also left relatively little space for comments in the gallery, because it's not the best place for an extended discussion (no wysiwyg, no BBC, etc).  So for wip images in the WIP board, the gallery should be used primarily as a host.  (Or of course, hosted elsewhere, which is fine too.)

If someone wants to get a lot of feedback about their wip images, perhaps they might want to create an album for all their wip images?  I did some brief testing the other day, and it looks like you can make an album private, and no one but you can see the images or thumbnails.  However, if you retrieve the URL and embed the image into a message, others can still see the image, even though it's in a private album.  (To me, that seems like it might be a bug, but I guess that's another story.)

Anyway, what that means, is that if you feel for some reason the wip images aren't pleasing to be viewed in a gallery, and you don't want visitors to browse through them, you can make the album private, and no one else can see it.  And you can still retrieve the URL and embed it in a topic in the WIP board, and everyone can see it there, and discuss.

Optimal size seems to be wider here than at the gallery.

FYI, for the forum, the max width for images is 1200 px, and the max height is 600 px.  I'm not sure how you've concluded what the optimum size should be.  I wonder if your screen size has any effect on what you see as optimum?  My screen, I've recently learned, may be extra wide, or something like that.  Your image in your last msg fills only about 4/5 the width of the message area, on my screen.  Screenshot attached.

[Lazur]

All at 125% zoom level.
Here are two full sized screenshots:
one of the gallery page and the other showing that image embedded here.

[Lazur]

...
FYI, for the forum, the max width for images is 1200 px, and the max height is 600 px...

Your svg previously attached above is 1447,63/1047,93 px sized, and still displayed, so maybe svg-s are an exception for that.

[brynn]

...
FYI, for the forum, the max width for images is 1200 px, and the max height is 600 px...

Your svg previously attached above is 1447,63/1047,93 px sized, and still displayed, so maybe svg-s are an exception for that.

Yes, I was wondering about that myself.  SVG may well not be considered an image, as far as how SMF software recognizes it.

Actually, there might be a mod available for the forum, which I guess would add a new button for svg tags (like you tried recently).  It seems like I saw one, but can't remember for sure.  But if that would be preferable (to using the img tags/button) for some reason, let me know, and I'll look into it.
___________

My screenshot was at 100% (no zoom).  Why are you zooming the browser to test the optimum size?  (just curious  )

It seems to me like the screen size and/or resolution should influence what size of an image will fill the screen, whether in the forum or in the gallery.  It will be different for different screen res, right?

[Lazur]

At 100% zoom level the screen is not used at it's fullness.
At the right and the left edge the background appears, and by zooming in 125%, only the content appears that I want to see.
On this screen at least.
Text can be read much easier too.

Different screen sizes would have their own "optimal" image sizes.
However the gallery's cropping/scaling svg-s to 700/700 px is a limit to all.

[brynn]

Oh, I see.       That's never occurred to me.  Interesting.  I guess you change the zoom depending on the layout of different websites that you visit?

In the past, on a different computer, I had changed the resolution to make everything bigger.  I was having some issues with my vision (cataracts) and needed everything bigger, to make it easier to see.  I never thought about before, but there really was very, very little empty space, lol.  Now I have the "bionic" eyes (lens implants) so I don't need everything bigger anymore.  Back then, browsers didn't offer the option to make only the text larger, like they do now.  That probably would have been better than changing the whole resolution.

However the gallery's cropping/scaling svg-s to 700/700 px is a limit to all.

On the intermediate page, all images are scaled to 700 px, unless the image is smaller than that.  [Edit - I could change that, if necessary, but it would be kind of a pain....because it wouldn't affect existing images, only those uploaded after the change....and there's a way to fix the existing images, but still kind of a pain.]  Anything over 700 px, for rasters, you need to click on the image to get the full size.  Over 700 px for SVGs.....well apparently they can't be displayed automatically.  You have to retrieve the URL and browse to it.

I think I discussed about that intermediate page in another topic.  There's a way to skip that and go directly to the full size, and it's a long story, but I think the result was not satisfactory.

I really hope we can get that plugin fixed, before too long   

[Lazur]

Yes, trying out different zoom levels for different sites.
It is also good to dodge annoying ads.

-Haven't installed google's spyware to block ads straight from their own ad company tracking the users browsing by default.
Theoretically I can block them manually but everytime I tried to open the right file to edit as root, suse just froze.

[brynn]

Oh, I know a lot about blocking ads, if you seriously want to block them all.

-Haven't installed google's spyware to block ads straight from their own ad company tracking the users browsing by default.

I guess this is a plugin for Chrome, or something like that?  Yeah, I really don't trust google.  I have a Firefox plugin or extension (whatever it's called) called Ad Block Plus.  However, I don't think it has much work to do for me.  That's because my HOSTS file blocks most of the crap before ABP ever knows they're there.

There are several varieties of HOSTS files that you can get.  I use the MVPS Host File http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm.  Or I'm sure if you just search "host file", you'll find more.  MVPS may not be very current, but it does the job for me.

However, now that I think about it, the HOSTS file may be a Windows thing.  I think Linux might not have such a thing.  So I guess I don't know so much after all, lol.  But I would guess there must be some way to block ads.  Doesn't Linux have some kind of software repository?  I've heard it's really easy to use.

[Lazur]

It is indeed if one has experience.
You only have to edit the host.deny file under /etc and save it.
Same as in windows, where you can do that under some system folders.

But somehow it just freezed when I tried to open the notepad with root  -after typing gnomesu gedit to the terminal.

[Lazur]

Started a new work in progress topic.
Uploaded png for it into the gallery with the size of 3000/3000 and after the upload it got scaled to 2400/2400.
So there is another limit for the images?
Better not to upload more than that 2400/2400 size.

Had alot try and error with this kind of images that I'm about to upload.
As svg-s, browsers don't render them right, parts are missing.
Surprisingly they even rendered with parts missing if saved as pdf-s.
The only choice seems to be is to export to png-s.

If image size is below about 1000/1000, an ungly interference appears between the parallel curves.
If image size is not even number in pixels and export resolution is not integer, even the paths are exported badly -small bumps appear between them. And transparency appears between paths exactly matching eachother.
That 3000/3000 png seemed one of the best outputs, however it cannot be viewed in the galery at 1:1?

[brynn]

Whenever you upload an image to the gallery, the image itself is uploaded, and the gallery creates 2 new version of it -- a thumbnail and an intermediate.  For raster images, clicking on the thumbnail displays the intermediate size; and then clicking on the intermediate size opens a new window with the full size image.

Do you mean that following that process, the full size image was not full size?

[Lazur]

Yes.

Clicked the thumbnail, then clicked on the image, which lead to open the full size version in a new window, and that was 2400/2400 instead of 3000/3000.

[brynn]

Oh ok, yes.  The max size for an uploaded image to the gallery is 2400.  But I don't have a problem changing it to 3000.  However, my host may have a limitation as well, and I don't know what that might be.

Also note that the max file size is 30720 kb (which I think is 30 mb).

I've changed the max dimension to 3000 now.  But you'll have to upload the image again.