Optimal Thumb Size?

[Scho]

The default thumb size for Imagemagick re-sizing is 110 pixels for the longest edge. Is this what most of you are using for your thumb size? I was using 130 pixels in 1.3RC when I was manually creating thumbs for uploading and will probably modify the Imagemagick default thumb size to at least 130 and perhaps larger. I realize there is a tradeoff in terms of page loading speed with a lot of thumbs and clarity of the thumb image. Any suggestions for what the optimal thumb size should be?

[Evanrich]

i use 90x137 for my thumbs, at 72 dpi, and 28x43 for my microthumbs.... you can see some sample images in my galleries if you want, www.modelxposure.com/gallery

[Scho]

Thanks Evan. What happens to your thumbs when you use a fixed size (eg. 90x137) and the original image proportions are different? Is the thumb cropped to fit or just squished to fit? I've been using the longest dimension for re-sizing since some of my original images are cropped and the dimensions vary. Right now I've got a mixed bag of thumb sizes and may have to go back and re-do them all to get a more uniform display when I decide on the final thumb size. I wonder if it is (or will be in an update) possible to re-create the thumbs for images currently in the database. My gallery is here:
http://www.schophoto.com/gallery/

[Pekka]

Scho wrote:
I wonder if it is (or will be in an update) possible to re-create the thumbs for images currently in the database.

Yes, there will be such an option.

Also, it is possible to code some new more intelligent resizing rules like "longest width 110, except never let height go less than 50" (in case width widens as much as needed to keep height 50 and image proportion same). We could call this "panorama size rule".

[Scho]

Sounds great Pekka. That will be a real time saver and I can wait for the upgrade to do my re-sizing.

[Evanrich]

i don't use the built in resizing with image magic or gd, because my host doesn't have imagemajik installed, only GD1 and GD2. I size my large images for 525x800 in photoshop, and then using windows XP image resizing power tools, i make 2 extra copies of the big photos, resize one set to 90x137, and 28x43... then just upload all 3 directories to my site...easy as that, and doesn't take me very long.

[msbc]

Evan and Scho,

How do you achieve the 'Grouping' of exhibitions on the gallery index page. I've created 2 exhibitions and added them to a group but I still get the 2 individual exhibitions on my home page. I can't find the EE setting to achieve this?

Thanks,
Mark

[Evanrich]

Mark... you may want to try adding more galleries.

Heres what i did:

1.) go into your ee setup page, and go to the item that says set exhibition groups under Exhibitions. Create a group name below by clicking on the add new group button. Give it a description, and an image if you wish. then click update all groups. After updating, go to the top part of that page, select your group on the left side, (for example on my page, i'll select Model Photo shoots) then on the rich, select which groups you want to be in that grouping, (use the ctrl or shift keys to select multiple galleries) once you select the galeries you want, push the "save this group" button, and your done.

2.) Repeat the above step for each additional grouping you want.


Optional: if you want to enable ratings for your groups, go to the EE Miscellaneous settings page, and scropp down till you get to Photo page settings. Under there, you will see two options. Show comments, and Show ratings. click those 2 boxes, and selct using ctrl or shift keys the galleries you want to allow people to leave ratings on. When done selecting, scroll all the way down, and hit the update settings button, or click on the page anywhere else and hit enter to update automatically.


Hope this helps you. PS... you are running 1.5 beta 4 correct? just wanted to make sure, because I think this option was added in 1.5.

[Pekka]

Scho wrote:
Any suggestions for what the optimal thumb size should be?

I approach the thumb size question mainly by trying to figure out why they are there:

The size of a thumb should be big enough to give an vague impression of what the photo represents (lure visitor to click it), but small enough to avoid making it a substitute for a large photo (so that visitor would not click it). So, with this principle, the thumbs should be quite small.

Microthumbs are not there to give visitor a good view of next/previous photo, but to give an "impression" of what's there, and work for shape-recognition capability of humans. Microthumbs should be considered only as fancy visual navigation "buttons". That is why they should be very small.

Also, consistent size of thumbs and microthumbs contribute to the consistent and organized look of the gallery, that is why I avoid using % sizing.

Above principles are why I chose those default thumb sizes in EE.

[Scho]

Pekka,

I agree with your logic for thumb sizes. The reason I posed the question initially was that when I asked for comments on my gallery site in the dpr forum, the two respondents both suggested that the thumbs were too small. However, when I checked their own web sites I found that one had very large thumbs that loaded slowly and the other had a mixture of thumb sizes in his galleries. As per your comments, I prefer a uniform, organized appearance and will stay with the smaller thumb size for the reasons you suggested.

Carl