You are not logged in.

#1 2005-03-05 09:10:51

dtw
Forum Fellow
From: UK
Registered: 2004-08-03
Posts: 4,431
Website

ugly Rox thumbnails?

Does anyone else have poor quality thumbnails in the latest version of rox?  Mine are rubbish!  I haven't updated because of it.

Offline

#2 2005-03-07 12:08:16

droog
Member
Registered: 2004-11-18
Posts: 877

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

Ya, I'm having the same problem, but only with small images. the large onesl like wallpapers scale down nicely, but images smaller than the thumbnails are getting scaled up too much and look like crap.

Offline

#3 2005-03-07 12:17:23

dtw
Forum Fellow
From: UK
Registered: 2004-08-03
Posts: 4,431
Website

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

yeah - that's exactly it

Offline

#4 2005-03-08 09:34:28

dtw
Forum Fellow
From: UK
Registered: 2004-08-03
Posts: 4,431
Website

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

Offline

#5 2005-04-22 09:58:38

droog
Member
Registered: 2004-11-18
Posts: 877

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

I'm dragging this one back up to see if you were able to get the 2.20 thumbnails working right, I'm still using 2.14. I just googled for a couple minutes and can't find anyone else having this problem.

Offline

#6 2005-04-22 18:57:35

neri
Forum Fellow
From: Victoria, Canada
Registered: 2003-05-04
Posts: 552

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

dibble, still have that issue ?

my guess its that the problem is not based on wrong thumbnailing but wrong displaying size. What says your dialog in:
right click -> Options -> Filer Window -> Display   in the
Icon View -> Default Size selection?

-neri

Offline

#7 2005-04-22 19:15:45

phrakture
Arch Overlord
From: behind you
Registered: 2003-10-29
Posts: 7,879
Website

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

ummm.... dibble... you have an image named "commonly used symbols for major cardiovascular organs.png"... wierdo! heh

Seriously though, if the update causes bad thumbnails, maybe they added a setting which defaults to something like "fit thumbnails to 80x80" instead of "fit thumbnails if larger than 80x80" - just guessing

Offline

#8 2005-04-23 00:17:57

droog
Member
Registered: 2004-11-18
Posts: 877

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

I ended up fixing it in pixmaps.c they changed changed a couple lines to speed up thumbnail creation that screwed it up. works perfectly now and i can use the batch renamer thats in 2.20 smile if it werent for that it wouldnt have bothered me to use an older version. i can post a patch if anyones interested.

edit: I was laughing when i saw some of the names of his files too, but then realized they were gant icons, and some of them have pretty funny names.

Offline

#9 2005-04-23 08:04:16

neri
Forum Fellow
From: Victoria, Canada
Registered: 2003-05-04
Posts: 552

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

droog wrote:

i can post a patch if anyones interested.

sure, we are. Also don't hesitate to send it over to rox people

-neri

Offline

#10 2005-04-26 02:43:55

dtw
Forum Fellow
From: UK
Registered: 2004-08-03
Posts: 4,431
Website

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

ok

1) icons names are from gant - yes it's stupid i dunno why he does it but he does good icons what can you say smile

2) yes I am still having the prob - i tried your suggestion a while ago neri, thinking I had missed something, but it didn't help, it just made others worse

3) post your patch droog smile

Offline

#11 2005-04-27 06:35:06

droog
Member
Registered: 2004-11-18
Posts: 877

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

I'm downloading a clean source to patch against now, the patch will just change the thumbnailing back to the way it was when it worked.
The rox guys won't want a patch that reverts it back. i've tried alot of things to get it working and this was the only way i've found.
The way it is now says true to keep aspect ratio, it just doesnt work.
What works best in package builds a diff -aur patch?

I'll either post the patch tonight or tomorrow morning. its only a few lines.

Offline

#12 2005-04-28 03:06:48

droog
Member
Registered: 2004-11-18
Posts: 877

Re: ugly Rox thumbnails?

Heres the patch, Don't forget to purge your thumbnail cache so rox can remake them, or itll load the poorly scaled ones from before.

diff -aur rox-2.2.0-orig/ROX-Filer/src/pixmaps.c rox-2.2.0/ROX-Filer/src/pixmaps.c
--- rox-2.2.0-orig/ROX-Filer/src/pixmaps.c    2005-01-16 08:48:02.000000000 -0800
+++ rox-2.2.0/ROX-Filer/src/pixmaps.c    2005-04-26 23:14:19.288985960 -0700
@@ -316,8 +316,8 @@
                 info1.st_dev == info2.st_dev &&
                 info1.st_ino == info2.st_ino)
         {
-            pixbuf = rox_pixbuf_new_from_file_at_scale(path,
-                    PIXMAP_THUMB_SIZE, PIXMAP_THUMB_SIZE, TRUE, NULL);
+            pixbuf = gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file(path, NULL);
+                
             if (!pixbuf)
             {
                 g_fscache_insert(pixmap_cache,
@@ -542,9 +542,8 @@
 {
     GdkPixbuf *image;
 
-    image = rox_pixbuf_new_from_file_at_scale(path,
-            PIXMAP_THUMB_SIZE, PIXMAP_THUMB_SIZE, TRUE, NULL);
-
+    image = gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file(path, NULL);
+    
     if (image)
         save_thumbnail(path, image);
 

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB