Quote:
Originally Posted by jackie_w
Am I understanding this correctly? You are saying that the existing 320x320 extracted/reduced thumbnail would be re-inflated to 400x400, i.e. a 25% increase in both dimensions - therefore on a TabPRO a 29x45mm cover should display roughly as 36x56mm? The unknown quantity being how pixellated the average cover would appear. I'm guessing some will look better than others.
|
Yes, that is what my experiment did.
Quote:
|
In an earlier version of CC, covers with large areas of solid red were a bit problematic (happily fixed). I've just looked at a couple of them on the TabPRO and they look OK at the existing Large size. Would these be the ones most likely to deteriorate if 'blown up' to 400x400?
|
This is exactly the problem. Some people are extremely touchy about image quality. I worry that giving the option to show a reduced-quality bigger image will increase chatter. If that chatter is from people like you and PatNY then there is no problem. If the chatter appears as 1-star reviews then there is.
Quote:
If adding the pseudo-x-large is 'easy', maybe suck it and see? People will use it or not if the pixellation is excessive. The risk is that people may like the physical size but ask for a better resolution extract from the source, which is probably not what you want.
Hmmm?
|
I am thinking that I need to simply suck it up and offer an option to control the size of the cover downloaded from calibre. That way a person can choose small covers displayed large (lower quality), large covers displayed small (very high quality), or large covers displayed large (normal quality). The issue for us is how to explain what the option means and what it does.
The next release will contain an attempt at the option. I hope that you in the prerelease community will help me with the option text. As I have said before, such text is something that I am really bad at. I tend to be wordy, and some people say I give too much of the wrong kind of info.
