Choosing the Initial Thumbnail Size

I have been playing around with IMatch (v. 3.4.0.29) in the last few 
days.  One of the things that seems important at first is the choice 
of thumbnail size, since it cannot be changed once the database is 
created.  And you don't want to import 50,000 photos and find out 
that the thumbnail size is too small to see!!!

TEST #1: I created a few test databases to try and figure out what 
the optimum size is for my situation, and thought that I would share 
the info with all of you (in hope that another newbie might find it 
of interest).

All of the databases were created using the same number of photos: 
1299.  Most of the photos (> 95%) are JPG, with the rest Canon RAW.  
At the moment, I have a total of around 10,000 photos, but I thought 
that the smaller amount would give a good representation that could 
be extrapolated upwards.

FYI: I have a 19" monitor set at 1280 x 1024.  The thumbnail size 
that you choose should depend on your settings (as well as your 
eyesight).

I tried three different thumbnail settings: 160x160, 200x200, and 
300x300.  I started at 160x160, since that is what a few people 
recommended.  I ended at 300x00 since I have read a few people 
recommend setting the thumbnail size at the largest setting, and 
then choosing a Thumb-Lens Setting (which is basically a zoom ratio) 
to reduce it later.

I kept all other settings/options the same for these tests 
(including the thumbnail quality).  In the end, the only file that 
changed size was the .IMT file (which I assume stands for IMatch 
thumbnail).

Here are the resultant sizes for the IMT files:

160x160:  8,466 KB
200x200: 10,569 KB
300x300: 18,980 KB

So if I extrapolate these to 10,000 photos, I end up with:

160x160:  65,173 KB
200x200:  81,363 KB
300x300: 146,112 KB

TEST #2: My next (and most important) consideration was ergonomics 
(or how does it look on the screen).

Let me start at the largest thumbnail size...

At 300x300, I was only able to fit three thumbnails across the 
screen comfortably.  Although the thumbnails looked great, I would 
end up getting carpal tunnel from all of the scrolling I would have 
to do.  I then reduced the zoom ratio to 75% (which makes the 
thumbnails 225x225), and I was able to fit four thumbnails across 
the screen, which wasn't too bad.  If you further reduce the zoom 
ratio to 50% (which makes the thumbnails 150x150), I could fit five 
thumbnails across.  But IMHO, if you are going to consistently 
reduce the size of the thumbnails by using the zoom ratio, then you 
might as well save yourself some disk space and start with the 
smaller size in the first place.

At 160x160, I was able to fit five thumbnails across the screen 
comfortably, but there was some unused space on the right side of 
the screen.  Why waste screen space?  So I moved to the next size up.

I created another test database using the 180x180 size.  But this 
time I only used a few dozen photos.  At 180x180, I was able to fit 
five thumbnails across the screen comfortably, but this time there 
was no unused screen space and the thumbs were larger.  I decided 
that this was the best thumb size for my situation.

TEST #3:

Since I settled on 180x180 as my thumbnail size, I decided to try a 
few tests on the Thumbnail Quality.

Once again, I created three test databases: The first with quality 
set to its lowest setting, the second with quality set to its mid-
level setting (which is lower than the default setting), and the 
third with quality set to its highest setting.

I kept all other settings/options the same for these tests.  Once 
again, the only file that changed size was the .IMT file.

Here are the resultant sizes for the IMT files:

Lowest quality: 2,158 KB
Mid-level quality: 6,363 KB
Highest quantity: 16,877 KB

I could barely tell a difference between the mid-level and high-
level quality.  But I could definitely tell a difference at the low-
level.

SUMMARY:

- Create test databases using various thumbnail sizes and quality to 
determine what works best for you

- I ended up choosing the 180x180 thumbnail size at the mid-level 
(~50%) quality setting. As I said at the beginning, I have a 19" 
monitor set at 1280 x 1024.  The thumbnail size that you choose 
should depend on your settings (as well as your eyesight).

IMATCH RECOMMENDATIONS:

- Allow the user to change their thumbnail setting once the database 
is created.  I understand that it will probably take a long time to 
do this operation, but is better than having to recreate the whole 
database itself.

- Allow the user to choose the zoom ratio (via the Thumb Lens) for 
thumbnail size.  If a user chooses a larger than needed thumbnail 
size (such as 300x300), they currently only have the 50% and 75% 
options.  It would be better if they were allowed to type in a zoom 
ratio from 0-400%.






 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imatchuserforum/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/