Image scroll viewing feature?

Ideas for improvements and requests for new features in XnView Classic

Moderators: XnTriq, xnview

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Image scroll viewing feature?

Post by ghost zero » Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:19 am

There's a quick Flash animation of this concept on the net. It would be great if XnView can do something like this to speed up the experience of viewing multiple images and side-by-side! So users can jump to any picture in a folder a lot faster than viewing forward/back one pic at a time.

BTW: There used to be a program called PicWalker 4.2 that does similar to this, but it is no longer developed--and the implementation wasn't perfect.

Click link to see quick Flash animated demo:
http://megaswf.com/serve/82809/

Screenshot preview...
Image
Last edited by ghost zero on Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:35 pm, edited 11 times in total.

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 31607
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Image speeding viewing feature?

Post by xnview » Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:14 am

ghost zero wrote:Image

Quick Flash animation:
http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image ... ingcn2.swf

There's a quick Flash animation of this concept on the net. It would be great if XnView can do something like this to speed up the experience of viewing multiple images and side-by-side! So users can jump to any picture in a folder a lot faster than viewing forward/back one pic at a time.
Yes, a great feature, an user has already made this request...
Pierre.

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:31 am

so is this a possibility of a next version of xnview?

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Thu May 31, 2007 9:00 am

any progress?

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 31607
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by xnview » Thu May 31, 2007 9:07 am

ghost zero wrote:any progress?
Currently i have other important things to do before that :-)
Pierre.

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:39 pm

getting any closer yet?

User avatar
budz45
XnThusiast
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: UK

Post by budz45 » Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:36 pm

Oh this would be very cool to see,

I think it may be implemented best thing is not to pressure the author who is trying best to meet everyones needs

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Thu Aug 02, 2007 10:08 am

this feature would start the next image viewing revolution! :D

User avatar
budz45
XnThusiast
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:05 pm
Location: UK

Post by budz45 » Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:37 pm

ghost zero wrote:this feature would start the next image viewing revolution! :D
WHat do you think on a Vista Media Centre like viewing mode for Xnview, would look cool too huh

SEE IMAGE :_ http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/6553 ... otohg9.jpg
All My Topics || my 'MP' Topics
My own Bookmarked topics--->for me only

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:59 am

any chance?

pic_viewer
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:53 am
Location: Germany

Post by pic_viewer » Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:14 pm

Hmm, both are not for me. May I suggest a solution that gives the same end result, but is much easier to implement and fully XnView like? Changing the thumbnail size!

Now guys, how many of you have ever done this? I bet many use the default size, some may have better monitors and set it a little bit bigger. I use 192 x 144 when I browse quickly through bigger folders. But changing to 384 x 288 lets me view the whole pic in real preview quality and browse throught the folder similar to the quickflash method presented above.

The only thing missing here is a hotkey that lets me change quickly between both thumbnail sizes...without going through the menu...and that should be easier to add than a completely new viewing mode...

User avatar
JohnFredC
XnThusiast
Posts: 2010
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: Sarasota Florida

Post by JohnFredC » Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:35 pm

pic_viewer wrote:The only thing missing here is a hotkey that lets me change quickly between both thumbnail sizes...without going through the menu...and that should be easier to add than a completely new viewing mode...
Yes! See my old request here!
John

ghost zero
Posts: 348
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:26 pm

Post by ghost zero » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:47 pm

pic_viewer wrote:Hmm, both are not for me. May I suggest a solution that gives the same end result, but is much easier to implement and fully XnView like? Changing the thumbnail size!

Now guys, how many of you have ever done this? I bet many use the default size, some may have better monitors and set it a little bit bigger. I use 192 x 144 when I browse quickly through bigger folders. But changing to 384 x 288 lets me view the whole pic in real preview quality and browse throught the folder similar to the quickflash method presented above.

The only thing missing here is a hotkey that lets me change quickly between both thumbnail sizes...without going through the menu...and that should be easier to add than a completely new viewing mode...
but problem w large thumbnails is that they are cached, and we dont need duplicated large images on our hard drives. plus you cant go fullscreen mode with thumbnails...

User avatar
JohnFredC
XnThusiast
Posts: 2010
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: Sarasota Florida

Post by JohnFredC » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:47 pm

ghost zero wrote:<snip>we dont need duplicated large images on our hard drives.<snip>
Sorry, but duplication is not an issue for me and many other users. Storage is so inexpensive these days that I have a couple of empty TB available most of the time. Duplicate thumbs is no problem.
John

pic_viewer
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:53 am
Location: Germany

Post by pic_viewer » Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:06 am

JohnFredC wrote:Yes! See my old request here!
Oh...sorry, missed that one!

Post Reply