Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mr ChriZ]

I mentioned the other day I'm making a plugin
for batch resizing of images.
http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=batchmanhg6.png
I'd like to ask your opinions on how this should work,
if you were to use it.
I looked at how Photoshop does things.
I've realised that because I'm batch doing stuff it's going to have to work
slightly differently.
To start with I'm going to just work on changing the Width and Height by pixels,
and then add resoloution stuff later if I feel it's working and I'm
not getting in above my head so to speak.

I'm wondering if you guys ever actually scale things
where the proportions are not constrained?
I can't think of a reason for doing this.

Therefore....heres what I'm thinking of doing.
Rather than working in Height and Width,
due to the fact that the images maybe in different orientations
it would make sense to work more with
longest side and shortest side?

The user would request that say the longest
side of the image would be no longer than x pixels.
or alternatively the shortest side of the image would be no longer than
y pixels....
Batchman would then work out the correct preportions to
keep the image scaled proportinatley.
This idea could be extended to have an option which would
make the largest image possible based on the two options above.
The actual scaling of the images will be done to start
by .NET's built in imaging routines.  If this does not provide sufficient
quality then I'll start to look to some kind of command line based
system probably...

All thoughts appreciated.

[Mr ChriZ]

Hang on thats not to clear I'm going to try and bring up a
sketch as to how it would work.

[glynor]

I'm wondering if you guys ever actually scale things
where the proportions are not constrained?
I can't think of a reason for doing this.

I would say as close to never as is possible without going over.  If I ever did need to do this for some wacky reason, I'd almost assuredly be already in Photoshop and be using the Free Transform tool anyway.

Long side/short side would be fine by me.

I'd have to see the quality before using it.  As long as it's Bicubic it should be fine.

I should say again though... I would only rarely use this function (especially since the Windows XP Powertoy Image Resizer works so well).  I'd mainly like to see something that would do this based on printed size and resolutions, as I mentioned in the other posting.  The other feature I'd really like to see would be the capability to resize a copy of the original (since I basically never want to resize the original), and have that new version automagically re-imported into MC, preferably with the same metadata assigned as the original but with some notation in some field that it's resized.  That might be asking a lot though, and I'd settle for just the copy thing.   

[Mr ChriZ]

The idea was that it wouldn't replace the original,
and that a destination directory would be entered.

If this destination directory was monitored by Otto
the files would be automatically imported.

In time I may add an option to manually import if it's easy to do.

The other option I intended to have was an option to delete
the files immediatley.  This would be useful where the files were
just for website uploads.

[Mr ChriZ]

OK heres what I've got in mind for the moment
http://img93.imageshack.us/my.php?image=batchmanscreen2fx8.png

[Edit]
Updated with few extra options

It will probably be simplified a bit with dropdowns.

[glynor]

The idea was that it wouldn't replace the original,
and that a destination directory would be entered.

If this destination directory was monitored by Otto
the files would be automatically imported.

In time I may add an option to manually import if it's easy to do.

The other option I intended to have was an option to delete
the files immediatley.  This would be useful where the files were
just for website uploads.

Actually all that sounds fine.  Having Otto handle the re-import is probably good enough, but if it's not too hard it might be nice (since you already have the file handle right there) -- rather than waiting for Otto to "wake up".

How is the file naming scheme going to work?  What if I choose the same directory as the original as the destination?  (Actually, a checkbox to put the new copy with the original would be nice.)

I looked at the mockup... I like the idea and all the options, but I think you could do better.  Let me think about it, I might have something tomorrow.

[Mr ChriZ]

Since it's batch copys for the time being the filenames will be the same.
If theres enough requests for it then I may work on an expression style system (ala rename files from properties), but that would take a bit more work, so would be in a later release.

First release would probably stop you placing the files in the same directory.

[marko]

I'm lurking with interest...