Suggestion for Selection Ratio

Ideas for improvements and requests for new features in XnView Classic

Moderators: XnTriq, xnview

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for Selection Ratio

Post by Olivier_G » Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:35 pm

xnview wrote:But for example, orientation is portrait. I want to make selection of 3:2 ratio, i must change orientation, and then choose the ratio!
Right... When you start from Default (ie: Ratio=Free + "Use image's orientation") and would like to use a fixed Ratio oriented at 90° to the image (such as in your example: 3:2 horizontal selection in a portrait image), you would need 2 actions (choose Ratio then Orientation or Orientation then Ratio).

Some comments:
- In this new system, "Power-Users" (interested in efficiency) will just need 1 click (for Ratio) and occasionaly an additionnal shortcut to choose the other Orientation... not that bad. And the very large majority of cropping is done with the same orientation as the image...
- At first I found the 2 lists system (2:3.... and 3:2...) to be confusing (wondering which one was horizontal - ie: if you choosed as X:Y or something else...)

Now: you are right, and we may find an even better solution!

Any idea ?
(I thought of 3 plain lists for Horizontal, Vertical, Same orientation... of Ratios and Orientations with detailled sub-level options... but wasn't pleased with either...)

Olivier

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8175
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: Suggestion for Selection Ratio

Post by helmut » Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:51 pm

xnview wrote:Yes, i understand. But for example, orientation is portrait. I want to make selection of 3:2 ratio, i must change orientation, and then choose the ratio!
Olivier has given the good arguments, already (Thanks!). Below some more aspects (or same in different words):

Currently, a typical situation is:
User is choosing ratio for his image 2:3.
"Oh damn, I should have selected 3:2".
User selects again.
"Hmm, the portrait selection before was better."
User selects 2:3, again.

With the suggested solution, novice users get along quite well. Ratio and orientation is clearly separated and the user does not have to think about two things at a time. In most cases, the automatic orientation provided by XnView will make sure that the selection can be used right away.
In those cases where orientation is wrong, the user can simply and quickly change the orientation by "Toggle selection's orientation".

And power users get a long very well with Short cut.

Currently, we have found about 10 useful ratios already. If we kept with the current approach, we would have 20 menu items, already. Selecting the right menu items amongst 20+ menu items will become a nuisance, soon.

The drafted solution might not be perfect, but it's already very flexible, gives both novice and power users good support and is far better than the current usage in XnView 1.74.

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 32081
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Suggestion for Selection Ratio

Post by xnview » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:11 am

helmut wrote:
xnview wrote:Yes, i understand. But for example, orientation is portrait. I want to make selection of 3:2 ratio, i must change orientation, and then choose the ratio!
Olivier has given the good arguments, already (Thanks!). Below some more aspects (or same in different words):
Ok ;-)
So the "Set selection ratio" menu becomes:

Code: Select all

Free
------------------------
1:1              (1.00)
2:1              (2.00)
3:2              (1.50)
4:3              (1.33)
5:4              (1.25)
16:9             (1.78)
Letter A4, A3, ...  (1.41)
US Letter        (1.29)
Cinema 1         (1.85)
Cinema 2         (2.35)
------------------------
X Landscape
  Portrait
  Same as image's orientation
------------------------
Custom_Selection
Save selection as custom
[/b]
Right?
Pierre.

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Some changes...

Post by Olivier_G » Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:40 pm

Small changes from previous suggestions:

Code: Select all

X Free
  Same as image
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  Custom
   Save selection as custom
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  1:1                (1.00)
  2:1                (2.00)
  3:2                (1.50)
  4:3                (1.33)
  5:4                (1.25)
  16:9               (1.78)
  A4, A3...          (1.41)
  US Letter          (1.29)
  Cinema 1           (1.85)
  Cinema 2           (2.35)

---------------------------
  Landscape 
  Portrait 
X Same as image's orientation 
Changes are:
- Helmut: "Same as image" and Custom group near top
- Me: no "Letter" with "A4, A3..."

Olivier

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8175
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:48 pm

The menu is almost perfect. Some more ideas and details (we are really getting down to the nuts and bolts, now.)

In the draft in the previous post, the menu items for orientation (Landscape, Portrait, ...) which will be also used quite often, are at the very bottom of the menu. But moving these towards the top will complety screw up things, since we then have menu items for ratio and orientation all mixed up.

So I wonder whether there should be another entry in the main menu "Edit":

Main menu 'Edit':

Code: Select all

Selection - Size (which should become superfluous and be removed one day)
Selection - Ratio
Selection - Orientation
Submenu 'Selection Ratio':

Code: Select all

X Free
  Same as image    Ctrl+<key>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  Custom
   Save selection as custom
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  1:1                (1.00)
  2:1                (2.00)
  3:2                (1.50)
  4:3                (1.33)
  5:4                (1.25)
  16:9               (1.78)
  A4, A3...          (1.41)
  US Letter          (1.29)
  Cinema 1           (1.85)
  Cinema 2           (2.35)
Submenu 'Selection orientation':

Code: Select all

Swap width & height   Ctrl+<key>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  Portait
X Landscape
  Use image's orientation
The menu items in "Orientation" (Portrait, Landscape, Use image's orientation) would apply for any selection, regardless whether the selection was created manually or by using "Selection - Size", or "Selection - Ratio".

This is a clear and very strict seperation, but usage might not be that obvious, especially to novice users. To make this clear, when selecting a predefined selection ratio or selection size a message box could appear:

"If you want to change the orientation of the selection, you can use the menu item 'Edit > Selection orientation > Swap widht & height' or the short cut 'Ctrl + <key>.
[ ] Don't show this message again."


And last not least:
Both shortcuts (see menus, above) should be usable with the left hand, since mouse is on right side (sorry to the left-handed people).

Think this solution might please both novice users and power-users. Olivier et al, what do you think?

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Post by Olivier_G » Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:26 am

helmut wrote:The menu is almost perfect. Some more ideas and details (we are really getting down to the nuts and bolts, now)

...[snip]...

Olivier et al, what do you think?
I liked all your propositions. It looks excellent and very well thought. Nothing to add, really... 8)

Olivier
(...ok: I'm going back night-clubbing, now... :mrgreen: )

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 32081
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by xnview » Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:38 am

Olivier_G wrote:
helmut wrote:The menu is almost perfect. Some more ideas and details (we are really getting down to the nuts and bolts, now)

...[snip]...

Olivier et al, what do you think?
I liked all your propositions. It looks excellent and very well thought. Nothing to add, really... 8)

Olivier
(...ok: I'm going back night-clubbing, now... :mrgreen: )
In menu size&ratio, is it better to show value in landscape or portrait mode?
1:1 (1.00)
2:1 (2.00)
3:2 (1.50)
or
1:1 (1.00)
1:2 (2.00)
2:3 (1.50)
Pierre.

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Landscape

Post by Olivier_G » Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:48 am

Ratios are best known as [longer side:shorter side], such as in "3:2" and "4:3" in photography, "16:9" in TV, etc...
So I believe it is much better to always show the values as in landscape mode.

Olivier

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8175
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Wed Jan 19, 2005 7:45 am

I thought about the orientation submenu, again and found that it is wrong: The orientation's listed are more or less options for 'Selection - Ratio' and 'Selection - Size', so they belong to these and must not be separated.

I suggest a menu structure like this:

Main menu 'Edit':

Code: Select all

Swap width & height   Ctrl+<key>
Selection - Size (which should become superfluous and be removed one day)
Selection - Ratio
Submenu 'Selection Ratio':

Code: Select all

X Free
  Same as image    Ctrl+<key>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  Custom           Ctrl+<key>
  Save selection as custom
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  1:1                (1.00)
  2:1                (2.00)
  3:2                (1.50)
  4:3                (1.33)
  5:4                (1.25)
  16:9               (1.78)
  A4, A3...          (1.41)
  US Letter          (1.29)
  Cinema 1           (1.85)
  Cinema 2           (2.35)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  Orientation -->                     *
Sub-sub menu 'Orientation':

Code: Select all

  Portait
X Landscape
  Use image's orientation
The orientations, which are actually initial orientations, are not changed that often (they are options), therefore they can go into a sub-sub menu. The extra label 'Orientation' even helps grouping the menu items. Perhaps labelling it 'Initial Orientation' would be even clearer.

The 'Selection - Swap width & height' have gone to the 'Edit' menu, this is correct since this function is independent of how the selection was created (manually or using Ratio or Size). Also, now the menu item can be accessed quickly using the short cut or the mouse.

Sure enough, the 'Selection - Size' sub menu must also have a sub-sub menu 'Orientation'. Not sure whether the initial orientations for Ratio and Size should be independent, but I think so.

Please note that the 'Custom' has also a short cut. This is useful for example for those users who have 4:3 images (from digital camera) and still want to have 3:2 images in their photo album.

Comments and feedback is welcome. (Olivier, could you postpone the night clubbing a bit? ;-))

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 32081
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by xnview » Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:25 am

helmut wrote:I thought about the orientation submenu, again and found that it is wrong: The orientation's listed are more or less options for 'Selection - Ratio' and 'Selection - Size', so they belong to these and must not be separated.
Not agreed, because Orientation is used by "Selection size" and "Selection ratio", so we must keep sub menu Orientation.
Pierre.

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Post by Olivier_G » Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:28 pm

helmut wrote:I thought about the orientation submenu, again and found that it is wrong: The orientation's listed are more or less options for 'Selection - Ratio' and 'Selection - Size', so they belong to these and must not be separated.
Well, I don't see the problem: as long as it is easy to understand and convenient to use... it's all good. I preferred the previous solution.
helmut wrote:The orientations, which are actually initial orientations...
Huh? Why? When you "Swap width & height" it moves into its new orientation state. My 'temporary' suggestion was only for the "Use image's orientation"... as it makes little sense to have a "Perpendicular to image's orientation" (but then, we could add some symbol to this line to show that it is actually perpendicular to image's orientation: like a * or [P] or whatever...).
And when the Selection is manually created, the program could use the X and Y size and automatically set the orientation (X<Y => Portrait, otherwise => Landscape) and manage it accordingly.
helmut wrote:Not sure whether the initial orientations for Ratio and Size should be independent, but I think so.
I am not convinced, as the "subject" is the same (aka: selection) and that they cannot be used both at the same time.
helmut wrote:(Olivier, could you postpone the night clubbing a bit? :wink: )
(Secret: I didn't really night-club yesterday... I Armagetroned :-D )

Olivier

Lostclown
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:21 am
Location: Iceland

Post by Lostclown » Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:57 pm

First I think these are really good suggestions and I look forward to seeing them implemented.
xnview wrote:
helmut wrote:I thought about the orientation submenu, again and found that it is wrong: The orientation's listed are more or less options for 'Selection - Ratio' and 'Selection - Size', so they belong to these and must not be separated.
Not agreed, because Orientation is used by "Selection size" and "Selection ratio", so we must keep sub menu Orientation.
Helmut means to keep the orientation settings separated for "Selection size" and "Selection ratio". I have to disagree with this as it seems duplicated to me and as Olivier has pointed out they cant be used both at the same time. So keeping it separate would only be useful if the user is switching back and forth between "Selection Size" and "Selection Ratio" and wants to keep the orientation different. This is not a likely situation (for me at least).

Helmut didn't you suggest taking "Swap width & height" up from the Orientation submenu because of this? If so then I also believe it should be located in the submenu as was suggestet earlier.

There is only one thing I personally like to see different from what has been suggested. This is to put the "Custom" selections to the bottom of the submenus. So if there are reasons for putting it up that I have not noticed, please comment.

Regards, Lostclown

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8175
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:03 pm

Thank you all for your valuable comments and feedback. I admit that the menu structure suggested first looked nice and smooth. So I do understand that you disagree my last suggestions. At first I also thought that the menu structure was good, but when looking closer at it and thinking about each functionality and it's usage, it became clear to me that it's o.k., but not really good and correct.

I'll try to explain in more detail and hope that you can see the ideas behind the new menu structure.

Let's have a look how the user will work with the selection:

- Orientation - Manual, arbitrary selection
The user has selected an area in the image manually. Now he/she wants to change the orientation of the image. He/she simply selects "Selection - Swap width & Height" and the orientation will be changed. Please note that the user can change the orientation without even thinking whether the current selection is "Landscape" or "Portrait". That's easy.

- Orienation - Predefined Selection (Size or ratio)
If there is a selection with predefined size or ratio, changing the selection's orientation works exactly the same as for manual selection: The user simply selects "Selection - Swap width & height", and voilà, orientation is changed. Again simple.

- Options!
So it becomes clear that the menu items "Portrait", "Landscape", and "Use image's orientation" are neither needed for changing the orientation of a manual selection nor for changing the orientation of a selection with predefined Size or ratio.
When selecting one of these 3 menu items, nothing will/should happen, since they all together make up one option. This option "Orientation" is used when selecting one of the predefined ratios and size (these are real functions) and creatíng a new selection.

- Options and Functions together.
We have the options dialog for options, so this option for the selection could actually go there, but this option might be changed often, so I'd like to keep it close to the actual functions they affect. Also when putting the option into the option dialog, the label for it would become very long and people still would not understand the options purpose.

This is why the option for orientation should go to both "Selection - Ratio" and "Selection - Size".
Olivier_G wrote:
helmut wrote:Not sure whether the initial orientations for Ratio and Size should be independent, but I think so.
I am not convinced, as the "subject" is the same (aka: selection) and that they cannot be used both at the same time.
You might be right, here. But two spots (=sub menus) to set the same option is a bit odd. So I'd prefer two options (=submenus), one for "Selection - Size" and one for "Selection - Ratio".
Olivier_G wrote:(Secret: I didn't really night-club yesterday... I Armagetroned :-D )Olivier
Just read the intro post of the Armagetron forum. Sounds like good fun.

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8175
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:12 pm

Lostclown wrote:First I think these are really good suggestions and I look forward to seeing them implemented.
Right. The solution is very good, already and we are really in the details, now.
Lostclown wrote:Helmut means to keep the orientation settings separated for "Selection size" and "Selection ratio". I have to disagree with this as it seems duplicated to me and as Olivier has pointed out they cant be used both at the same time. So keeping it separate would only be useful if the user is switching back and forth between "Selection Size" and "Selection Ratio" and wants to keep the orientation different. This is not a likely situation (for me at least).
Right. For example, I've never user "Selection - Size". One option will do here.
Lostclown wrote:Helmut didn't you suggest taking "Swap width & height" up from the Orientation submenu because of this? If so then I also believe it should be located in the submenu as was suggestet earlier.
"Swap width & height" should go to the "Edit" menu because of two reasons:
1.) It can be used for both manual & predefined selections.
2.) It should be easy to access using the mouse & keyboard.
Lostclown wrote:There is only one thing I personally like to see different from what has been suggested. This is to put the "Custom" selections to the bottom of the submenus. So if there are reasons for putting it up that I have not noticed, please comment.
In fact, "Custom" is normally at the bottom. It was moved towards top to make accessing it easier. From my point of view, top or bottom is both o.k.

User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Psychology ?

Post by Olivier_G » Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:23 am

Helmut, we may actually be discussing a philosophical/psychological issue... :-D

If I understand your explanation correctly [1]:
- A selection, wether manually created or directly selected (eventually adjusted through the 'swap' action) is an object on its own. Therefore it becomes independant of the Orientation settings.
- The "Portrait", "Landscape", "Use image's orientation" are considered as options effective only when you select a new Ratio/Size.
=> Now I understand your 2 sub-menus Orientation, in Ratio and Size.

Here is my version [2]:
- "Portrait", "Landscape" are not options, but real characteristics of the active selection ("Use image's orientation" being a special one).
- Using "swap" will really change the selection characteristics, and that will be reflected in the Orientation Menu (example: if the radio button was on "Portrait", it will move to "Landscape", etc...)
- As there is a direct link between the selection and the Orientation Menu setting, when you select a particular Orientation, the Selection will adjust accordingly.

That's a different interpretation. And from LostClown's reaction, I believe that he understood it as [2] as well. And in this version, two sub-menus doesn't make sense as you consider only the current selection.

We'll have to look at the differences in use, in order to choose the right one. Or just create a poll... :mrgreen:

First example: I create a 3:2 Landscape selection, move it, set it to "Free", adjust its size... and now, I want to re-use it immediately with the automatic "Use image's orientation" for next images. With [2], I will just click on "Use image's orientation" and that's it. How would you do with [1] ?

Second example: I have created a 3:2 Landscape selection, "swapped" it to Portrait, but I changed my mind and would prefer the 4:3 Ratio. With [2], I will just select the "4:3" Ratio and it will be directly in the right orientation (Portrait). And in [1] ?

Olivier

Post Reply