Images displaying larger than original

LanceH

I upload 1600 pixel images (long end). With the new site if I select x3 or original, the image is enlarged so much I have to scroll to see everything on my 1920 wide monitor. I'm pretty sure this should not be happening but can't find other threads on this. It used to be (I thought) that x3 was 1600 pixels. But now I have to select x2 max to keep Smugmug from enlarging images.

Image quality is degraded of course when this happens. But I'm also noticing that even at x2, when the image is displaying no larger than the original, (x2 seems to be 1600 pixels now?), there is a degradation of the image. It is soft and lacking clarity of the original.

Is this a known issue or am I imagining things?? sigh...

Hope this is resolved very soon.

There are other relatively minor bugs of course. This one drives me especially nuts.

thenickdude

Normally you should never have to scroll to see an image. Are you using your web browser's zoom feature? Try pressing command+0 (or ctrl+0 on Windows) to reset your zoom to the default.

LanceH

Thanks Lamah, but no I'm not using any zoom feature. If the original was much larger than my screens resolution then scrolling would be necessary. These "originals" are smaller than my screen. This doesn't address the image softness either way.

thenickdude

Do you have an example photo which demonstrates this problem?

LanceH

Sure, http://www.photographybylance.com/Models/Arielle

Note the original image is 1600x900 pixels. I've attached a screenshot to illustrate how much scrolling is needed on a 1920x1080 screen. (See if it attached properly..hehe).

I hate how soft the images look now too. Even when not displaying larger than it should. Smugmug used to display this image clean and sharp (like it truly is).

Thanks for your time and help with this. I'm a little concerned that nobody else is raising this issue. (Misery loves company :cry).

thenickdude

LanceH wrote: »

I'm a little concerned that nobody else is raising this issue.

Well, I imagine the reason for that is that approximately 0% of customers are going to discover and use that tiny little Image Sizes menu, when the image will already be filling their screen .

I'm afraid I couldn't replicate this issue on either Chrome or Firefox (both latest) on Mac. When I choose original, that photo displayed precisely 1600px wide for me, just fitting on my 1680 pixel display with room for a small border on each side.

On the other hand, if I use Firefox's zoom feature to zoom in a bit, I get exactly the result you've screenshotted. Are you running a Firefox add-on that could be zooming the page?

Do you still run into this issue if you log out of your SmugMug account first?

EDIT: Apparently the latest version of Firefox automatically adjusts your default zoom level to make it more than 100% if you've tweaked your screen DPI settings in Windows:

http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/963759

LanceH

Well, interesting. Logged in or not I get the same thing. Firefox and IE do the same thing. IE is actually worse as far as image degradation goes. At least the image is displayed sharp initially in Firefox. It's not until one messes with "that tiny little image sizes menu" that things get ugly. However the image is horrid in IE from the get-go. If the problem is on my end, why two different browsers and why only Smugmug and why only since this new change????? Makes no sense. Thanks Lamah. It will be interesting to see what the Smug hero's have to say.

Allen

LanceH wrote: »

... "that tiny little image sizes menu" ...

Another case of geeks getting cute. Why not just say "size" then everyone not in their
fantasy world would know what it meant.

I hate little icons when there's plenty of room to spell something out.

thenickdude

LanceH wrote: »

If the problem is on my end, why two different browsers and why only Smugmug and why only since this new change?

Both browsers are applying your system DPI settings, which affect the default zoom. But Firefox only started doing this a week or so ago, with version 22, so you would only have noticed it as the new SmugMug went live.

It's also possible that the old code just wasn't affected by browser zoom at all.

LanceH

OK Lamah, system DPI settings are set to 125%. I set it to 100% and bingo, no more distortiong on Smugmug. BUT...I really REALLY prefer it at 125% But it's effect now on Firefox and Smugmug display is really not OK. I don't see any preferences in Firefox to disable this new behavior. Any "about:config" tweek I can do? I can't imaging I'm the only one who had increased their system's DPI. My eyes ain't what they used to be with small text and I kinda need it. Images have never been effected until now apparently....I hope...

Hat's off to you Lamah for hanging with me here and helping me discover the problem. It's an issue that I don't think is entirely "my fault" and I doubt I will be the only one. Although I imagine most won't know what the image is supposed to look like...and therefore won't notice (they'll just assume I can't focus worth a damn ).

Thank you Lamah

LanceH

sigh...google firefox dpi settings and i'm astounded by the stupidity of Firefox. horrible timing for Smugmug too. being able to "fix it" on my end does not resolve the real issue; how things look to others. can't control that in this case. too bad.

thenickdude

Well, luckily there is virtually no reason to ever use the image sizes menu (the image is already displayed massive, and why'd you need it to be displayed smaller?), so I imagine very few visitors are going to run into the issue.

LanceH

image sizes are there for a reason and should work properly and never ever be increased beyond the original. likewise they should never be degraded as they are (without doing any resizing) thanks to the boneheads at Firefox and apparently IE as well. anybody and everybody that uses IE and or Firefox and has modified their system DPI will experience this problem. i don't agree that "very few visitors are going to run into this issue". the google search link i shared earlier demonstrates it's a problem far beyond Smugmug and effecting many.

thenickdude

What reason is that exactly? I honestly can't imagine a use-case for image sizes.