Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Relative zoom calculation: a drawback

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Requested Relative zoom calculation: a drawback

    I just discovered that the new method to calculate (next/previous) zoom level in v4.10 has a drawback.

    When progressively zooming in/out, starting from a "fit to window" situation, you have to "be lucky" with this new method to get well rounded values like 25%, 50%, 100% etc. Instead, you typically get something like 52%, 108% etc. depending on for example the window-size you started with, or how the actual size of the picture relates to your screen resolution. Because of the resampling going on, these views tend to be fussy. Unless I'm missing something, this means that in this situation you can't zoom to a "clear" version of the picture right now.

    So to work around this (since the "relative zoom increments" has its value as well), it would be good to be able to configure the original zoom algorithm instead. Or maybe a combination of <CTRL> or <ALT> with the zoom keys could be used to force the previous zoom algorithm, or it could be coded in such a way that it automatically rounds to 25/50/100/150/200 % when it comes close to those zoom values?

    Thanks for listening!

    #2
    Ok, so I found "<CTRL> + H" to get back to original size. Still is less convenient than having the rounded zoom-factors 25,50,100... automatically selected when you're zooming "near" them?

    Comment


      #3
      I, for one, would just as soon go back to the old plain bugless zoom.
      Its: Belongs to "It"
      It's: Shortened form of "It is"
      ---------------------
      Lose: Fail to keep
      Loose: Not tight

      ---------------------
      Plurals do not require apostrophes

      Comment


        #4
        Ah! that explains it.

        I knew the Zoom was not working like it had. I was even considering submitting a "bug report" for this change from what it was. I just was not realizing that the Zoom was now relative.

        This relative Zoom sucks. I liked what we had before. If I did Zoom (+) a few steps and then did a Zoom (-) the same number of steps, I knew I would have returned back to what I had. But NOT NOW.

        And the ability to use Ctrl+H to return to "Original size" is no good if you open a large picture (I have my settings to fit big images to desktop) since using Ctrl+H forces the view to 100%, which is not my "original size." Grrrr.

        I like the suggestion that JoH made, to have the ability to use either relative Zoom steps (like the way it is now) or have the Zoom steps like we used to have, with the use a <Ctrl> key with the press of the (+) or (-).

        Makes perfect sense:
        (+) or (-) for Zooming, and
        Ctrl+(+) or Ctrl+(-) for "controlled steps."
        I wish to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.
        Not like those passengers, in his car, when he drove over that cliff.

        Comment


          #5
          I think the featre could be greatly improved by adding a zoom contol as in Serif DrawPlus X2. See the attachments to this post.

          That offers the best of all options — very fast zooming by large steps, plus precise stepped increments from the zoom popup, and there is even a snap to 100% mark on the slider control.

          There are problems with implementation though. IV has to allow for zooming images ranging from 16 pixel icons to huge megapixel or even gigapixel images, with smooth resampling. And, of course, it must do this immediately. I don't want to wait more than 500 milliseconds.
          Before you post ... Edit your profile • IrfanView 4.62 • Windows 10 Home 19045.2486

          Irfan Paint • Irfan View Help • IrfanPaint Help • Riot.dll • More Skins • FastStone Capture • Uploads

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by ChuckE View Post
            This relative Zoom sucks. I liked what we had before. If I did Zoom (+) a few steps and then did a Zoom (-) the same number of steps, I knew I would have returned back to what I had. But NOT NOW.
            I completely agree. This is what I also said in the other thread.

            It would not be easy enough to zoom while holding another key. I vote for an option in preferences to choose either new or old way.

            Comment


              #7
              Oh, I don't mind if there were an option in the preferences to select the type of Zooming (relative or stepped), I also don't mind if the Ctrl key were used to select one over the other.

              I do see a conflict right now with the use of the Ctrl key.
              Using the Ctrl key while rotating the mouse scroll wheel will Zoom the image (which is currently only a relative Zoom amount, grrrr).

              Whereas the Shift+scroll does nothing special. The scroll, by itself, will make IrfanView progress through the other images of the current folder. The use of the Shift+scroll does exactly the same thing, thus no effect of the Shift.

              If it could be changed, I'd say make the Ctrl+scroll a (controlled) stepped amount of Zoom.
              AND I'd make the Shift+scroll a relative amount of Zoom (what the zooming is only, right now.

              ("Ah! if I were king!")
              I wish to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.
              Not like those passengers, in his car, when he drove over that cliff.

              Comment


                #8
                That makes sense
                Its: Belongs to "It"
                It's: Shortened form of "It is"
                ---------------------
                Lose: Fail to keep
                Loose: Not tight

                ---------------------
                Plurals do not require apostrophes

                Comment


                  #9
                  I prefer the ole way of zooming too. At least I was sure if turning the direction to get the original size back.
                  So at least an option which algoritm would be nice.

                  I wouldn't call this a bug.
                  Because it's just following the mathematical rules when one's using percentages as a unit.
                  The difference between multiply/division and percentages.
                  If one increases the size by 31 %, then decreases the size of the result by 31 %, no original size.
                  But if it's 'size x 1.6 x 1.6' and then 'new size : 1.6 : 1.6' ..
                  0.6180339887
                  Rest In Peace, Sam!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Not saying you are wrong, because you are not, but to use more realistic and understandable numbers for relative zooming.

                    When using the default increment of 10%:
                    Starting with an image that is 1000 pixels wide and
                    reducing by one click (-10%) = now 900 pixels.
                    Then, increasing by one click (+10%) = now it is 990 pixels.

                    The old way of zooming would have gotten us back to 1000 pixels.
                    I wish to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.
                    Not like those passengers, in his car, when he drove over that cliff.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      A solution may be: zoom in zooms 10% of the current zoom more, zoom out zooms 8,09% (actually 100/11) of the current zoom less: this would make sure that you can always get back to the previous zoom level.
                      IrfanPaint developer
                      The latest stable IrfanPaint version is the 0.4.13.70.
                      IrfanPaint is now open-source (released under BSD license).

                      Comment


                        #12
                        How is that a solution? And how would it be easily implemented?
                        Besides, I believe your numbers are wrong. I believe if the zoom in was 10%, then the zoom out ought to be 9.09% (1-(1/1.1)).

                        Which only works if you were to change from zoom in, to zoom out.
                        It is a different calculation if you were to go from zoom out, to zoom in.

                        What if I had steps (and I use this value) of 25%?
                        Would you then need? (actually it would be, for changing from zoom out to in, 20% (1-(1/1.25).

                        TOO COMPLICATED! A simple solution would be to simply put the old zoom steps in, that worked fine. Forget about relative zooming.
                        I wish to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.
                        Not like those passengers, in his car, when he drove over that cliff.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Yep - KISS. I don't see the point of having to think "percent of what?" all the time either.
                          Its: Belongs to "It"
                          It's: Shortened form of "It is"
                          ---------------------
                          Lose: Fail to keep
                          Loose: Not tight

                          ---------------------
                          Plurals do not require apostrophes

                          Comment


                            #14
                            If your landlord raises the rent every year with 3 percent, it seems like a steady thing, but in fact the statistic curve of your costs will not be lineair.
                            0.6180339887
                            Rest In Peace, Sam!

                            Comment


                              #15
                              OK, and that settles that.

                              How about the price of tea in China! ???
                              I wish to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.
                              Not like those passengers, in his car, when he drove over that cliff.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X