Inchiquin Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 If you use the new large thumbnail display on the search pages, vertical thumbnails are missing a bit at the bottom. So if you've tightly cropped a shot it may look badly composed to the customer. I'm guessing the reason for this is to restrict the height of the row a little so that the horizontal thumbnails in the row are not too large (they are already significantly larger than horizontals in rows that don't have verticals). I don't like it. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 20, 2015 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Agreed. Not ideal Kumar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShep Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I don't think this is just vertical thumbnails. A landscape format photograph in The Guardian today (F2F2R8) shows a woman in front of a temple in Laos. In the new large thumbnail and in the image shown with the mouse on a small thumbnail her feet are cut off. When the image is zoomed it shows, as printed in The Guardian, with her feet behind a low hedge.Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vpics Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Horizontal ones are also cropped. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDoug Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Even without the crop, I don't care for the new format. It would be better if the system would remember my preference for the old thumbnail grid and 120 per page, rather than having to change it repeatedly. My preferences may not matter much, but very likely there are buyers who agree and are bothered by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShep Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Even without the crop, I don't care for the new format. It would be better if the system would remember my preference for the old thumbnail grid and 120 per page, rather than having to change it repeatedly. My preferences may not matter much, but very likely there are buyers who agree and are bothered by it. Not just me then. New layout is fine for those who prefer it but I would definitely like to be able to set my own default to small thumbnails/120 per page. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 Ah, horizontal ones are only cropped on rows where there are no vertical thumbnails. That's obviously why I didn't spot it. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 Ah, horizontal ones are only cropped on rows where there are no vertical thumbnails. That's obviously why I didn't spot it. Alan I'm actually seeing the opposite. In rows with verticals all images are cropped. No? Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted November 22, 2015 Author Share Posted November 22, 2015 Ah, horizontal ones are only cropped on rows where there are no vertical thumbnails. That's obviously why I didn't spot it. I'm actually seeing the opposite. In rows with verticals all images are cropped. No? This is getting more and more silly! If there are no verticals in a row the horizontal ones are cropped at the bottom. If there is one vertical in a row the vertical one is cropped. If there are two or more verticals in the row all are cropped, the vertical ones quite severely. The height of the row, and the consequent sizes of the images, is different in each case. It's possible it may depend on the size of the window and just how many images are in a row. It looks like a bit of a dog's breakfast to me. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.