After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 152441 - fuzzy thumbnails, not sharp thumbnails
fuzzy thumbnails, not sharp thumbnails
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gthumb
Classification: Other
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: Paolo Bacchilega
Paolo Bacchilega
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2004-09-12 16:35 UTC by Robert Schultz
Modified: 2005-02-01 16:50 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
Proposed fix (3.44 KB, patch)
2005-01-20 03:39 UTC, David Moore 		none Details | Review

Description Robert Schultz 2004-09-12 16:35:14 UTC 
fuzzy thumbnails,  not sharp thumbnails

need sharp thumbnails,... and selectable to create a minim size

2.4.2 version, all others the same,
Suse 9.1  kde 3.3 , don;t know how to find the gnome version

thanks, Robert Schultz
Comment 1 David Moore 2005-01-20 03:39:00 UTC 
Created attachment 36273 [details] [review]
Proposed fix

Here is a patch that I propose to fix this bug.

The fuzziness is a combination of two problems:

1. When thumbnails larger than 128x128 are used by the user, the program still
internally uses a 128x128 thumbnail and scales up.  My patch uses 256x256
thumbnails internally when the user requests anything larger than 128x128, and
uses 128x128 internally when the user requests 128x128 and below.  This
capability is already supported by the libgnomeui thumbnail factory, I just had
to add support to gthumb for it.

2. There was an off-by-one bug in the normalize_thumb function that causes
thumbnails to be generated 1 pixel smaller than they should have been.	This
rescaling by 1 causes a lot of blurriness in the image.  The patch corrects
this.

Paolo, please contact me if this patch needs more work for you to be satisfied
with it.
Comment 2 David Moore 2005-01-31 22:44:48 UTC 
Is there any hope of getting this patch in?
Comment 3 Paolo Bacchilega 2005-02-01 07:56:13 UTC 
patch applied, thank you.
Comment 4 Robert Schultz 2005-02-01 16:25:54 UTC 
received the bugzilla, email, and that it was fixed.

but no indication , in what version it was fixed, ???
currently 2.6.3 does not list bug,

asume in the next release it will be fixed.

thank, you for everybody involved.
Robert Schultz
Comment 5 David Moore 2005-02-01 16:50:24 UTC 
Correct, the patch is in CVS now but will be available in the next release
(presumably that will be 2.6.4).