Bryan Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 We are still seeing the bottom of images being clipped in some of the available views, often destroying the sense of the photo. The treatment appears to differ between landscape and portrait images. Landscape: The large thumbnail default view and, surprisingly, the zoomed view, are both clipped. As far as I can see, it is only when the user opts to use the smaller thumbnail view or clicks onto a currently zoomed image for a maximum sized view that the entire image is displayed. OK, for a lot of shots this makes little difference, but, for some, important detail is missing. Take, for example, my image GD618R, a shot of a pub, the large thumbnail and the zoomed view show a truncated version of the image, which looks quite unattractive. Portrait: In some ways the default portrait view is even worse, although, in this case, the zoomed view does show an un-cropped image. See for example GB32EM, which shows a cyclist near the bottom of the frame. The default view is horrible, I would not be tempted to zoom it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 Sorry, I don't have the problem here with any of my images that I can find. . . no clipping of any images except on mouse-over (which then brings up new, unclipped view so it's not a problem). UPDATE - correction . . . on very, very closer inspection, I DO have a minuscule strip clipped from the bottom edge . . . but it's tiny. And it's what you report: On portrait layout in Large Thumbnail view, it's visible in only the thumbnail view--it disappears in the mouse-over preview. On landscape layout in LT view, it's visible in both thumbnail and mouse-over preview. And even though most of the time you'd have to look very very carefully to see it, in an image like yours with the bicycle at the lower edge, it does make a huge difference. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted August 1, 2016 Share Posted August 1, 2016 There may be another problem that somehow has the same root: some cut-outs were not being recognized as cut-outs by the automated filter. The difference was just that same part that remained invisible in the large thumbnail view. Could be a coincidence. Could be that it has been solved. Anyway I have not tried it since finding it out and solving it for myself by re-submitting a couple of cut-outs a good while back. The cutting off and the automated recognition of cut-outs did occur around the same time, if I remember correctly. Again this may just be one of those stupid post hoc ergo propter hoc thingies. wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted December 19, 2016 Author Share Posted December 19, 2016 The clipping problem is still with us. In large thumbnails view, which appears to be the default, a proportion of each image is not shown, the full image is seen in small thumbnail view, and in a zoom. This really does make some images look very unattractive, when a critical part of the photo is partially hidden, or there appears to be no space around it. I don't want to have to compensate by adding large redundant areas, I try to crop for maximum visual appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Chapman Posted December 19, 2016 Share Posted December 19, 2016 We are still seeing the bottom of images being clipped in some of the available views, often destroying the sense of the photo. The treatment appears to differ between landscape and portrait images. Landscape: The large thumbnail default view and, surprisingly, the zoomed view, are both clipped. As far as I can see, it is only when the user opts to use the smaller thumbnail view or clicks onto a currently zoomed image for a maximum sized view that the entire image is displayed. OK, for a lot of shots this makes little difference, but, for some, important detail is missing. Take, for example, my image GD618R, a shot of a pub, the large thumbnail and the zoomed view show a truncated version of the image, which looks quite unattractive. Portrait: In some ways the default portrait view is even worse, although, in this case, the zoomed view does show an un-cropped image. See for example GB32EM, which shows a cyclist near the bottom of the frame. The default view is horrible, I would not be tempted to zoom it! Interesting. I've looked at the image GD618R and can only see a tiny bit of clipping. I wonder if the browser/screen resolution/Operating system has any effect? I'm running Google Chrome on OSX El Capitan on a 1920 x 1080 display. I see the original image is 3264 x 4912 (1 : 1.5049 ratio) The Alamy thumbnail appears as 113 x 170 (1 : 1.5044 ratio) The mouse hover enlargement appears as 299 x 448 (1 : 1.498 ratio) The zoomed image (without Alamy banner) appears as 863 x 1300 ( 1: 1.506 ratio) They're all pretty close to 1 : 1.5 aspect ratio. The worst is the mouse hover enlargement. If I multiply the 299 x 448 image by 10.91639x it comes to 3264 x 4890.5 Assuming horizontal and vertical downsizing happens equally when creating the mouse hover image suggests about 21.5 pixels have gone from the height of the original image which equates to a 0.4% clip. Are you seeing the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 It was always standard practice to leave a safe zone around the edges of an image, particularly for Audio Visual or Television. I failed to leave enough here, and the tree reflection disappears off the bottom edge of the image in the default thumbnail and large thumbnail view, but not this sales page view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.