Topic: MC14 picture frames - Hit or Miss? (Read 5577 times)

marko · « **on:** June 01, 2009, 11:54:39 am »

For me, the MC14 picture frames are a definite miss.

I really don't like them. I find them to be distracting unnecessary clutter that pinch a few pixels away from the actual viewiable thumbnail area, and feel that they are especially ugly when the thumbnail rolls up to show the three hidden menu items. The larger the thumbnail size, the worse this ugly effect is, and when in 'fit to window' mode, not only is it at its worst, there's no hiding place for the mouse either, meaning that so long as the mouse is in the picture window, the image on show is always 'rolled up' showing those three totally redundant menu items.

I don't like to be negative, but I do feel quite strongly that these frames are a bad idea. Gynor and drosoph have both mentioned making them optional, but knowing historically that if every 'make it optional' suggestion were implemented, MC's options dialogue would be a very scary place indeed.

My suggestion is to just ditch the frames altogether.
Does anyone else have an opinion?

-marko.

JimH · « **Reply #1 on:** June 01, 2009, 12:00:33 pm »

I didn't like them when I first saw them, but I like them now. Maybe tomorrow I won't again.

gappie · « **Reply #2 on:** June 01, 2009, 12:07:30 pm »

i think they dont look nice with images that have a light background, like a white sky at the top. the sky merges with the frame the rest of the image does not. the result is ugly imo.. and i think the screen was already 'busy' enough, it introduces 'visual noise'.

gab

drosoph · « **Reply #3 on:** June 02, 2009, 02:12:50 pm »

I really don't like the frames ... they're very bold and stand out more than my photos when trying to scroll through to show people.
I'm very much for ditching the whole idea, I think it was a step back -- like using borders on table frames in HTML. Very ugly, and its just taking up more space.

GHammer · « **Reply #4 on:** June 02, 2009, 02:49:22 pm »

I like the frameless look myself.

darichman · « **Reply #5 on:** June 03, 2009, 07:55:21 am »

... I must agree with the posters above. I thought it might grow on me, as you said, but it hasn't so far.

I'm also noticing that many thumbnails are still building without the frame...

Matt · « **Reply #6 on:** June 03, 2009, 08:44:56 am »

Quote from: darichman on June 03, 2009, 07:55:21 am

I'm also noticing that many thumbnails are still building without the frame...

Frames are not part of the thumbnail. They're added at render time, just like drop-shadows.

darichman · « **Reply #7 on:** June 03, 2009, 09:23:17 am »

Ok... then I think there might be a problem with the rendering then - at least there is on mine. Are the frames meant to be visible from all views? I only seem to get them in playlist views, but not view schemes.

Matt · « **Reply #8 on:** June 03, 2009, 09:52:23 am »

Quote from: darichman on June 03, 2009, 09:23:17 am

Ok... then I think there might be a problem with the rendering then - at least there is on mine. Are the frames meant to be visible from all views? I only seem to get them in playlist views, but not view schemes.

They should only be used in image-only lists.

glynor · « **Reply #9 on:** June 03, 2009, 10:17:44 pm »

I already mentioned it once as well, but I have to agree.

Thumbs down on the frames.

dcwebman · « **Reply #10 on:** June 04, 2009, 07:20:47 am »

No on the frames

leezer3 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 07, 2009, 03:12:19 pm »

Very major miss.
Just ran into one of these, no way in heck I want them anywhere near my library.

Cheers

-Leezer-

Matt · « **Reply #12 on:** June 07, 2009, 04:18:03 pm »

I like them. So does my wife.

leezer3 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 07, 2009, 04:26:06 pm »

Quote from: Matt on June 07, 2009, 04:18:03 pm

I like them. So does my wife.

You're a dev, your opinion doesn't count

Seriously though, two things need to be done-
As a *minimum*, there needs to be an option to turn them off, and preferably to alter the color too (It's the sort of thing my mum would do)- I'd put this under Options==> Tree and View==> Thumbnails==> Image Framing==> On/ Off & Color. These are pure eye candy, and most definitely not to everyone's taste.
There also needs to be far more consistancy in their usage- I don't see why they have been limited to pure image lists at present; If you're using them in one place they should be used elsewhere, otherwise things descend into a mess.

Cheers

-Leezer-

marko · « **Reply #14 on:** June 08, 2009, 12:45:26 am »

I don't like them. Another week gone by, and the thought that these things may end up hard-coded into MC14 is not a pleasant one at all.

I'm the same when I print photos, I always use borderless printing. The pictures simply look better that way.

-marko.

marko · « **Reply #15 on:** June 08, 2009, 12:49:03 am »

drosoph also reinforces his feelings on the subject in the Build 09 thread.

leezer3 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 08, 2009, 06:45:05 am »

I have a nasty suspicion this may turn into one of the developers vs. the users debates

The situation where the developers like a feature and the users don't is happening more and more often; off the top of my head-
1. Theatre view navigation. Massive argument on this front.
2. Rollers. The developers like them, and suddenly everything is being built around them, rather than giving us a choice.
3. Now these picture frames.

In my opinion, you can *never* have options overload

All it needs is the options dialog to be laid out logically, and a neat little option for each of these provided, and everyone's happy, rather than the current squabbles.

Cheers

-Leezer-

JimH · « **Reply #17 on:** June 08, 2009, 07:08:53 am »

We'll remove them. That's what Matt wanted to know. Thanks.

JimH · « **Reply #18 on:** June 08, 2009, 07:11:12 am »

Quote from: leezer3 on June 08, 2009, 06:45:05 am

I have a nasty suspicion this may turn into one of the developers vs. the users debates
The situation where the developers like a feature and the users don't is happening more and more often; off the top of my head-
1. Theatre view navigation. Massive argument on this front.
2. Rollers. Absolute, total and utter abomination in my eyes, yet the developers like them, and suddenly everything is being built around them, rather than giving us a choice.
3. Now these picture frames.

In my opinion, you can *never* have options overload
All it needs is the options dialog to be laid out logically, and a neat little option for each of these provided, and everyone's happy, rather than the current squabbles.

Leezer,
Why don't you do the coding, and then let us call your work an "utter abomination"? That might be a lot more satisfying.

leezer3 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 08, 2009, 07:47:04 am »

Sorry, harsh words (In my defence I did add in my eyes), and weren't meant to offend; Edited

Being honest though, I very much feel that the point I'm trying to make is a valid one. (Several of us have expressed this in the relatively near past)
Irreversible changes seem to be getting made, whose main proponent seems to be the developers, rather than the users. While this isn't a bad thing per se, it's limiting flexibility, and forcing people to change the way they work.
If something is created and used sucessfully for a long time, I really feel that it's a mistake to shut it out simply for the shiny new alternative that's been built.

Back onto topic, as I said above, please don't remove the picture frames altogether. They're the sort of thing that a certain segment of the userbase will like, and an option will keep everybody happy.

Cheers

-Leezer-

cncb · « **Reply #20 on:** June 08, 2009, 02:39:20 pm »

I guess I'm in the minority but I like them. I always thought the thumbnails could use a little something to set them apart and I think this does that well.

darichman · « **Reply #21 on:** June 08, 2009, 06:11:15 pm »

I think if there going to be an advantage in having frames for image thumbnails, it would be in telling the difference between images/videos in mixed views (eg photos and video clips from a camera). I guess it depends on how much work goes into making the feature "optional"... If it's all or nothing, I'd rather see them go. There are some situations where a differential treatment of thumbnails for different media types may be useful however...

I feel sorry for the frames now... $:-\$

joshhuggins · « **Reply #22 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:51:34 pm »

I like them also. They are running very snappy. I also like the scrolling. I think they give a nice finished feel to everything. Some people are super minimalist. I appreciate design a lot as Architecture is my main field, but I don't think these limit flexibility in anyway as mentioned by leezer3. What I might recommend is make it a skinable option. Something that the skins can take advantage of and make unique for each skin may be a really nice feature and provide some neat effects. If it's to hard to provide access to the rendering engine needed to provide them then maybe an toggle option should be added for the frame haters

. But I think they fits very well into the overall feel of MC without being too overkill in any way IMHO. The drop shadows really pop with my fav skin No4. too

I say good work kids!

ThoBar · « **Reply #23 on:** June 09, 2009, 12:55:10 am »

I kinda like them, not in love with them, but I think they look OK.

Would be interesting to see if they produced a nicer stack effect - but maybe not...

robydago · « **Reply #24 on:** June 10, 2009, 04:10:37 pm »

I like them.

Why do you wanna throw away the code you wrote? I'd go for the option to turn them on\off.

Better still, add an option for "dynamic" frame colors: the color of each frame is the one that has the more contrast possible with the colors at the border of the picture it is framing...

eba · « **Reply #25 on:** June 10, 2009, 04:51:29 pm »

Quote from: confishy on June 09, 2009, 12:55:10 am

Would be interesting to see if they produced a nicer stack effect - but maybe not...

I definitely like the stacked effect.

Overall, I like them, but this may just be because it's different, and I always like a change for variety's sake

MrHaugen · « **Reply #26 on:** June 11, 2009, 05:13:30 am »

I did not like it. Just a waste of space imo. The shadow effect is enough to make it stand out from the background anyway.

gappie · « **Reply #27 on:** June 11, 2009, 05:52:31 am »

as i stated before, i dont like them. but if they are here to stay they should work always with images. i put the videoos i made with my photocamara, in the same views as the images. the frame now jumps on and of depending on if there is a small vid there.

and if they are to stay, could it be skinable, at least the image used, with a dark skin the white frame really does not look good.

Daydream · « **Reply #28 on:** June 11, 2009, 10:26:53 am »

Quote from: gappie on June 11, 2009, 05:52:31 am

and if they are to stay, could it be skinable, at least the image used, with a dark skin the white frame really does not look good.

That's the spirit. +1

marko · « **Reply #29 on:** June 28, 2009, 05:09:47 am »

Quote from: JimH on June 08, 2009, 07:08:53 am

We'll remove them. That's what Matt wanted to know. Thanks.

Is this still in the pipeline, or has there been a stay of execution?

JimH · « **Reply #30 on:** June 28, 2009, 06:12:49 am »

Quote from: marko on June 28, 2009, 05:09:47 am

Is this still in the pipeline, or has there been a stay of execution?

They're going. Or there will be a switch setting.

marko · « **Reply #31 on:** June 28, 2009, 06:26:43 am »

Cool.

I haven't actually counted, but at the moment, the 'ayes' and 'no's' in this thread seem pretty evenly balanced, so, a switch could be well received.
Good luck convincing Matt

JimH · « **Reply #32 on:** June 28, 2009, 06:34:09 am »

Quote from: marko on June 28, 2009, 06:26:43 am

Good luck convincing Matt

It's hot. The air conditioner doesn't work very well. It could have an "accident".

benn600 · « **Reply #33 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:56:28 am »

Wouldn't this be a good option feature? There are so many things that seem to be split down the middle and I personally like the frame a little bit and could see others liking the option at least. Work to undo previous work...hmm.

park · « **Reply #34 on:** July 06, 2009, 10:19:36 am »

I have to say that I like them, but one thing...

To really look like photo prints (the 8x4" kind) the border should be thinner at the top and thicker at the bottom.

Matt · « **Reply #35 on:** July 06, 2009, 11:44:38 am »

14.0.24 and later has an option to disable frames.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: MC14 picture frames - Hit or Miss? (Read 5577 times)