Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
i believe it is the following workaround in class.model that is causing this,
because i have noticed it myself.
if(!$Images)
{
/* Work-around for returning at least ONE image when none fit the specified aspect ratio */
$whereClause = sprintf('model_id = %1$d AND mut_deleted = -1', $this->getID());
if($SetID)
{
$whereClause .= sprintf(' AND set_id = %1$d', $SetID);
}
}
might be a good idea to get the image width and height of the returned file,
and multiply it by a factor that will give it an aspect-ratio scale
Original comment by mranimos...@gmail.com
on 22 Feb 2012 at 7:10
I think you're right. I know the man who wrote that work-around :)
The download_image.php processes the image correctly. For the landscape-version
of VikaZ02, for example, it returns a 100x150 pixels aspect scaled image.
That's nice.
The browser, however, sees the width="225" height="150", and stretched the
image accordingly.
I propose to work on a javascript (jQuery) solution for de-stretching and then
centering the specific images. I'll give this some thought.
What do you think?
FWieP
Original comment by fwp...@gmail.com
on 22 Feb 2012 at 11:26
why not just remove the width and height tags from the <img> tag, and add
text-align: center to the .SetThumbImageWrapper style.css class.
Only problem with that is the delete-image overlay doesn't center with the img,
so some fiddling will be needed
Original comment by mranimos...@gmail.com
on 22 Feb 2012 at 10:29
Remove the width-attribute, brilliant! No client side fiddling with
loading/analyzing images, no server side queries for determining the set's
image ratio... brilliant. Thanks.
About the overlay, I knew it would need some tweaking before being OK. I'll
look into this. I'll check in my working copy (r324) and begin working on that
overlay.
FWieP
Original comment by fwp...@gmail.com
on 23 Feb 2012 at 5:33
Resolved in r329, with one remark: I had to give up the text-align:center.
If anyone has a better overlay-and-delete up their sleeve, please say so. For
now, I would call this matter closed, issue resolved. Agreed?
Portrait-only sets are a minority anyhow :-)
FWieP
Original comment by fwp...@gmail.com
on 23 Feb 2012 at 5:53
Issue resolved, as per consensus.
Original comment by fwp...@gmail.com
on 25 Feb 2012 at 8:44
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
fwp...@gmail.com
on 22 Feb 2012 at 6:15