XnView Software

First of all , thanks for supplying XnView free of charge. It is great.


Now to my suggestion/rant about the similar file search in XnView MP.

- Why can the size of the preview images not be scaled? I'd like to make this whole window bigger so i can actually see the pair of possibly duplicate images, not just small thumbnails.

- Why is the feature to "interlink" the image pair removed from XnView MP? Wouldn't it be nice to click on the zoom in button and it would zoom in on both images at the same time? Or if i drag one zoomed in image, it should drag the other image to the same position simultaneously. And again, why can the whole window not be made bigger? I can zoom in but the window is still just thumbnail sized, very hard to figure out if images are just similar or actual duplicates.

Right now the whole similar file search function is just a huge pain.

dontango wrote:First of all , thanks for supplying XnView free of charge. It is great.


Now to my suggestion/rant about the similar file search in XnView MP.

- Why can the size of the preview images not be scaled? I'd like to make this whole window bigger so i can actually see the pair of possibly duplicate images, not just small thumbnails.

- Why is the feature to "interlink" the image pair removed from XnView MP? Wouldn't it be nice to click on the zoom in button and it would zoom in on both images at the same time? Or if i drag one zoomed in image, it should drag the other image to the same position simultaneously. And again, why can the whole window not be made bigger? I can zoom in but the window is still just thumbnail sized, very hard to figure out if images are just similar or actual duplicates.

Right now the whole similar file search function is just a huge pain.

Yes, the GUI there should be updated.

But, personally, I have a more global vision on this. I'd dedicate a version upgrade to improving the Search capability among other things. This is because the engine also needs updating.

Read here: http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=28396

dontango wrote: - Why is the feature to "interlink" the image pair removed from XnView MP? Wouldn't it be nice to click on the zoom in button and it would zoom in on both images at the same time?

It was removed???



My two cents:
- Add maximize and maybe minimize button(s) to this window;
- Reduce (or remove) the width of empty borders and empty spaces (i.e. compact interface #1);
- Reduce line spacing in info fields... (i.e. compact interface #2);
- Move buttons/fields inside this window (i.e. compact interface #3);
- Increase the width of "Delete button" (maybe icon with a title on right side);
- Move "Sort by" "Next/Previous arrows" and "Cancel button" into same row (also i don't think that "Next/Previous arrows" is useful at all);
- Bring back "Interlink" mode for zooming and panning... maybe checkbox ritgh in the current window?
- And last but not least - implement "High zoom quality for Zoom-out" feature! Because current "nearest neighbor" looks very bad.

I mean.... look at my FAST example:

We have already a very good Compare engine for photos. Select 2-4 photos and go to Tools | Compare...

The tricky thing is to gather the 'suspect' files for the Compare view in the fastest and most intuitive way. The link which I've provided above deals rather with the inner workings of the gathering subsystem.

So, while I appreciate any suggestion on the matter, I think that the GUI part for 'comparing' similar images is more or less done.

The other things are more sensible.

This is about batch comparison, not about a couple of files.
And i do not think these changes require a lot of programming. Only a little work in UI editor...

Also

m.Th. wrote: Yes, the GUI there should be updated.

and

m.Th. wrote: So, while I appreciate any suggestion on the matter, I think that the GUI part for 'comparing' similar images is more or less done.

The other things are more sensible.

Well, i'm confused now.
And i wonder, you're a XnView developer?...

Litr wrote:This is about batch comparison, not about a couple of files.
And i do not think these changes require a lot of programming. Only a little work in UI editor...

Yes - batch comparison. And the challenging parts today on batch comparison are:

- speed of comparison which can be greatly enhanced (many orders of magnitude) by giving some hints to the program, saying for example, that "my archive does NOT contain duplicates. Just check these 10 folders with 5555 files in it against the archive with 1,000,000 files in it.". Also a big feature but rather easy to implement is change the algorithm from CRC32 to CRC32C (iSCSI CRC) and CRC32C caching. And this requires programming. Is not hard but Pierre must be attentive to do it right.

-screen organization which is subdivided in two parts: the Compare Pane (which more or less we have designed in the Compare Window) and the Duplicates Pane (which we have more or less in the dialog which we talk about).

Well, theoretically Pierre can update/enhance these sub-systems separately but it will be a tedious work because a programmer (btw are you a programmer? ) tends to have his mind in a certain area of the program. It is very difficult and dangerous to jump around to fix the Problem A in the part B, problem C in the package D and after this to go back to the part B and enhance the feature F.

To be sincere, for me personally, enhancing the Search for Duplicates engine is one of the top priorities (see the date of my previous thread with extensive analysis in it - link above in this thread) but I understand why Pierre didn't touched it yet.

Also

m.Th. wrote: Yes, the GUI there should be updated.

and

m.Th. wrote: So, while I appreciate any suggestion on the matter, I think that the GUI part for 'comparing' similar images is more or less done.

The other things are more sensible.

Well, i'm confused now.
And i wonder, you're a XnView developer?...

When I say that "the GUI part for 'comparing' similar images is more or less done." I meant it is "done" in the Compare Window. But as you observed, that window is tailored for a small number of files. Now we must 'introduce' the above part (the Compare Pane) with all its tooling in the window for Duplicate Search. No need to re-write different code to reach to more or less same functionality. It will be a maintenance nightmare.



No, I'm not a XnView developer. Just happens to have a little programming background.

I'm sorry, but your suggestion to compact the ui is disastrous and would certainly damage the user experience.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement in this ui, but removing margin and spacing is definitively the wrong method for cleaning up a ui.
200% more cluttered for 25% smaller isn't an improvement in my book.

thibaud wrote:I'm sorry, but your suggestion to compact the ui is disastrous and would certainly damage the user experience.
I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement in this ui, but removing margin and spacing is definitively the wrong method for cleaning up a ui.
200% more cluttered for 25% smaller isn't an improvement in my book.

+1.

I humbly think that white space enhances readability not hinders it.

Also, IMHO we must concentrate in enhancing & studying the workflow of a certain task and upon this to build/change the code/GUI/storage. Not saying that we must not pay attention to the ergonomics (including here the aesthetics) - on contrary - but these must be a necessary effect of a concrete human need.

I do not understand this.

Why do you need all these huge margins and rows with buttons? They are so beautiful? They are so useful?

They reduce the image comparison area - main area of this window. Change some margins, but not all, change some borders and move some buttons - thats all! This is just not rational in current state.


m.Th.
But this is a workflow improving! Again, i do not understand this attitude at all.



(guys, sorry for my english! )

Litr wrote:I do not understand this. ...Why do you need all these huge margins and rows with buttons? They are so beautiful? They are so useful? ... They reduce the image comparison area - main area of this window...

Hello,
+1
I also prefer a compact appearance, but as "all tastes are in nature," it is equally logical that some do not like this, and prefer a window appearance a little bit more dilated ...

Litr wrote:I do not understand this.
Why do you need all these huge margins and rows with buttons? They are so beautiful? They are so useful?
They reduce the image comparison area - main area of this window.

Yes margin are extremely useful.
and it's not the margins that reduce the image display area (margins are a substratum of the other ui element on this window)
This is not a matter of aesthetics or preference.
There are certain rules, they may sound trivial or absurd to some of you...
But theses are backed-up by tons of data that has been gathered since the early day of AB testing to measure the efficiency of most aspect of ui design.

Again, I'm not saying that this ui is fine as it is.
But fighting against margins isn't the right horse to pick when trying to improve (or compact) a ui.

Yes margin are extremely useful.
and it's not the margins that reduce the image display area (margins are a substratum of the other ui element on this window)
This is not a matter of aesthetics or preference.
There are certain rules, they may sound trivial or absurd to some of you...
But theses are backed-up by tons of data that has been gathered since the early day of AB testing to measure the efficiency of most aspect of ui design.

Oh, please.



Okay, one more time... Let me show you a compact interface. Without huge margins, fields and empty rows! Even without cancel button. With a compact group of controls on top and bottom.

It's ok for you? I think the answer is yes.
But this is the same program - XnViewMP!

0000226: [Requests] Smaller similar dialog - viewtopic.php?f=60&t=29085

YAY!!!
It is really unexpected! Thank you!


(tip: you need to drag the window border to update the window geometry)