File Type Icons

[DJX]

How 'bout different icons for different files types.

Like how when you associate jpg's, bmp's, png's, etc.. with Windows Picture and Fax Viewer it gives you a different icon for jpg's and different icon for bmp's and so on.

I know this would be a tidious task but the results may be worth it. Maybe not for all files types right away either. Like, just do jpg's and bmp's with the next release and then make new icons for png's and gif's next. That should break up the work load of making the icons.

Any way, I think it would be a nice idea.

[matera]

Already is. Go to Properties, Extensions, and find the "Miscellaneous" button hiding way over on the right. Option to use different icons in there. One of those little things tucked too far back in the corner.

[Sam_Zen]

Agreed. Much too hidden.

[DJX]

Thank you, but yeah, hard to find.
Any way, not the best looking icons but its better. I like windows picture and fax viewers icons better becuase they look all shiny and professional.

Like I said, though, better then all the same.

[Sam_Zen]

I don't care about shiny or looking professional. Such icons just have to be clear as different indicators in this case.
Thanks Matera. I never noticed this option in "Miscellaneous". So far I associated the different icons for different graphic formats via my file-manager. So the cat for a BMP and a palmtree for a JPG. But for times until now, on unexpected moments,
I lost those settings, so all formats got the cat again. Maybe this enabling will enhance this situation.

[Sjef]

Hi DJX,
I agree about your wish for different icons for IV associated files types. The use of IV's icons.dll as a plugin is one way of improving the looks of your file manager but still depends on your taste if you'll like them or not. At another place and time on this forum I've got this tip of the next URL:
http://irfanview-online.com/viewtopic.php?t=354 and I use them since then (no annoying untill this day). They have the looks of Adobe icons but the maker still respected the Irfan cat manifest, so you can still see they are IV-reladed. I love them!

[Sam_Zen]

I'm pretty happy with the standard icons of IV. And I don't like the set of the icons.dll plugin, because they're just too small on my screen to read, and secondly, why should I read 'jpg' while I already can see the extension of the file ?
Apart from matters of taste, but this option in "Miscellaneous" says 'Icons for the associations'.
It's a choice for a certain set, either the IV set where one can choose one default icon for all associated extensions of IV, or the choice for a set via a plugin. There's no function to actually choose a single icon and assign the association with a single extension.

[matera]

The Windows icons that look all "shiny and professional" to some people look blurry and vague to me. They are made for what I call the "idiot view" - big icons and no information. Old-fashioned folks like icons with colors and patterns that are bold and easily recognizable when small.

Sometimes when I get tired of the icons I change the ones in the DLL with a good icon editor. Usually I am too lazy and just spot the files by the difference in color.

[Sjef]

Most people use Windows but lots of them are moaning and groaning about various aspects of their OS. Like for instance the funcion of an icon. For me the definition of a pictogram or icon is the usual old little picture of 32×32 pixels to which the user directly recognizes the associated application of the file.

Many users don't have affections with the looks of a graphical user interface and only interested in the details of files. Their ?icons? are hidden or as small as 16×16 allmost unregognizable pixels. I use over 150 applications and I want an immediate recognition of my files. The details comes at second place.

It's the same as browsing through pictures with the IV browser. It's handy when you can see a picture and not just the file name. The details are seen in the IV viewer (at the status bar or with the i-key).

[Sam_Zen]

As you say : icons aren't better with further details. It's a matter of recognition of the right area, and thereby knowing which app is involved.

[Sjef]

In the old days I used my Commodore 64 in the first place to learn Basic. But I just took real pleasure in that machine when I discovered GEOS, a WIMP-environment before MS-Windows. (WIMP=Windows, Icons, Menu, Pointer). So: I like the alfabet, but my eyes gets more caressed by pictures. Compare cuneiform writing with Egyptian hierogliefs or Chinees characters.

[Sam_Zen]

Right on. With the alfabet one can make a name, but with a pictogram one can tell a 'concept'.
And the recognition goes much faster than reading.

But I personally have no need for each possible fileformat of IV having different icons. Almost all my audio-formats are associated to other apps, most video-ones, so I just needed distinctions among the graphic files.
For this purpose, the basic set of IrfanView is sufficient. I could even add info about the property of the file, by choosing
two variants of the cat for BMP and TIF, as being uncompressed types, and the rest for the compressed ones, like JPG and PNG.

[Sjef]

One picture tells more than my words. Here's what I see on my monitor. I prefer the left pane of this IV-panorama image.

[DJX]

I love to hear different people's views and I'm glad I opened up this thread. Thanks for the link and picture, I will try out those icons. Thanks again.

Edit:

Tried them out...nice icons, just missing one for SWF as far as I can tell and something wrong with TTF (Could just be my machine through).
Otherwise not bad. Yeah, these look "shiny and professional" and from CS3 too so great.

Did you say that there are other plugins for IV that I can download?