Fontsize for Tooltip?

[Heiner Lamprecht]

Hi everybody,

is there any way to influence the font size in the tooltip, that
shows details of an image when the mouse is over the image?

On my screen, the text is about 1.5 mm height, which is a bit hard
to read.


Thanks,


    Heiner

--
    heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net    GnuPG - Key: 9859E373
  Fingerprint:  3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:02, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :
> Hi everybody,
>
> is there any way to influence the font size in the tooltip, that
> shows details of an image when the mouse is over the image?
>
> On my screen, the text is about 1.5 mm height, which is a bit hard
> to read.
>

Are you installed/used TTF fonts ? Here with my 19" flat pannel (1280*1024),
the tip can be read correctly...

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Heiner Lamprecht]

On Monday 05 June 2006 11:36, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:02, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :
> >
> > On my screen, the text is about 1.5 mm height, which is a bit
> > hard to read.
>
> Are you installed/used TTF fonts ?

I have installed a lot TTF fonts.  Which ones are used in
particular?

> Here with my 19" flat pannel (1280*1024),

Same hardware.


    Heiner

--
    heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net    GnuPG - Key: 9859E373
  Fingerprint:  3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:42, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :

> On Monday 05 June 2006 11:36, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> > Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:02, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :
> > > On my screen, the text is about 1.5 mm height, which is a bit
> > > hard to read.
> >
> > Are you installed/used TTF fonts ?
>
> I have installed a lot TTF fonts.  Which ones are used in
> particular?
>

Courier New 12 from win32

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Heiner Lamprecht]

On Monday 05 June 2006 12:37, Gilles Caulier wrote:

> Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:42, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :
> > On Monday 05 June 2006 11:36, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> > > Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 11:02, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :
> > > > On my screen, the text is about 1.5 mm height, which is a
> > > > bit hard to read.
> > >
> > > Are you installed/used TTF fonts ?
> >
> > I have installed a lot TTF fonts.  Which ones are used in
> > particular?
>
> Courier New 12 from win32

Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center for
other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the font used
in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).


Any idea?


    Heiner

--
    heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net    GnuPG - Key: 9859E373
  Fingerprint:  3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center for
> other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the font used
> in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
>
>
> Any idea?
>
>
>     Heiner

funny, it's the same in my 0.9.0 svn, thought it was my strange install :-)
titles are the same small in 0.8.1 and 0.9.0, but data is much smaller in
0.9.0, see attachements...

regards
Daniel
--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland
professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com
special interest site: http://www.bauer-nudes.com

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 15:01, Daniel Bauer a écrit :
> Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> > Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center for
> > other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the font used
> > in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
> >

Yes there is a difference in the code between 0.8.x and 0.9.0, because there
are more informations to show in album item tooltip. I have just use the
0.8.x font size -1 in 0.9.0, elese the window is too large. If someone have a
better idea...

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Heiner Lamprecht]

On Sunday 04 June 2006 16:22, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 15:01, Daniel Bauer a écrit :
> > Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> > > Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center
> > > for other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the
> > > font used in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
>
> Yes there is a difference in the code between 0.8.x and 0.9.0,
> because there are more informations to show in album item
> tooltip.

Maybe there are too much items displayed?  For example, I assume,
that the majority of the users will have "normal" file extensions.  
So, when I see the name of an image, I normally know its filetype.  
There is no need to display it in the tooltip.  It would be enough
to have it in the properties tab.

> I have just use the 0.8.x font size -1 in 0.9.0, elese
> the window is too large. If someone have a better idea...

I assume, you reduce the font size via HTML-tag in the text, right?  
Normally, this does not reduce the size by one pixel, the step is
larger.  Can you explicitly set the fontsize?


    Heiner

--
    heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net    GnuPG - Key: 9859E373
  Fingerprint:  3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 16:33, Heiner Lamprecht a écrit :

> On Sunday 04 June 2006 16:22, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> > Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 15:01, Daniel Bauer a écrit :
> > > Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> > > > Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center
> > > > for other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the
> > > > font used in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
> >
> > Yes there is a difference in the code between 0.8.x and 0.9.0,
> > because there are more informations to show in album item
> > tooltip.
>
> Maybe there are too much items displayed?  For example, I assume,
> that the majority of the users will have "normal" file extensions.
> So, when I see the name of an image, I normally know its filetype.
> There is no need to display it in the tooltip.  It would be enough
> to have it in the properties tab.

Yes, i'm agree with you. There are too informations displayed.

I would to have more viewpoints in this room...

>
> > I have just use the 0.8.x font size -1 in 0.9.0, elese
> > the window is too large. If someone have a better idea...
>
> I assume, you reduce the font size via HTML-tag in the text, right?
> Normally, this does not reduce the size by one pixel, the step is
> larger.  Can you explicitly set the fontsize?

Yes and the font type, but this can be a problem if the font is not
available...

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Marcel Wiesweg]

Am Sonntag 04 Juni 2006 15:01 schrieb Daniel Bauer:

> Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> > Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center for
> > other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the font used
> > in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
> >
> >
> > Any idea?
> >
> >
> >     Heiner
>
> funny, it's the same in my 0.9.0 svn, thought it was my strange install :-)
> titles are the same small in 0.8.1 and 0.9.0, but data is much smaller in
> 0.9.0, see attachements...

I can confirm this, here the font size is even so small that some symbols are
not displayed correctly, e.g. n,h,u, which may be a font / freetype problem
but it is as it is.

BTW, in the comments on your screenshot, there is nothing but "0 0 0 0...". Is
that common with some pictures? Then we should add some code to cut
whitespace and zeros.

Marcel

>
> regards
> Daniel
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Duncan Hill-5]

On Sunday 04 June 2006 16:43, Marcel Wiesweg wrote:

> BTW, in the comments on your screenshot, there is nothing but "0 0 0 0...".
> Is that common with some pictures? Then we should add some code to cut
> whitespace and zeros.

The zeros appear to be part of the latest SVN changes - they certainly weren't
there last week!
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 17:43, Marcel Wiesweg a écrit :

> Am Sonntag 04 Juni 2006 15:01 schrieb Daniel Bauer:
> > Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 12:43 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> > > Strange.  When I select this font e.g. in the Control Center for
> > > other applications, it is displayed as expected.  But the font used
> > > in digikam is by far smaller (see attachments).
> > >
> > >
> > > Any idea?
> > >
> > >
> > >     Heiner
> >
> > funny, it's the same in my 0.9.0 svn, thought it was my strange install
> > :-) titles are the same small in 0.8.1 and 0.9.0, but data is much
> > smaller in 0.9.0, see attachements...
>
> I can confirm this, here the font size is even so small that some symbols
> are not displayed correctly, e.g. n,h,u, which may be a font / freetype
> problem but it is as it is.

Well my pending question : some informations need to be removed in tooltip ?
If yes, witch ?

>
> BTW, in the comments on your screenshot, there is nothing but "0 0 0 0...".
> Is that common with some pictures? Then we should add some code to cut
> whitespace and zeros.

Marcel,  0 0 0 0 0 0 ... can be reproduce with my MRW images, when i import
from my camera or when I add it to database before to start a new digikam
session.

Try to use my RAW repository images here :

http://digikam3rdparty.free.fr/TEST_IMAGES/RAW/HORIZONTAL/

Nota : i use Exiv2 from svn (or 0.10.0), not 0.9.1.

Gilles
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Heiner Lamprecht]

On Sunday 04 June 2006 18:07, Gilles Caulier wrote:
>
> Well my pending question : some informations need to be removed
> in tooltip ? If yes, witch ?

I think, to be able to answer this question, we should first talk
about an other one:  In which situations and for what purpose does
the user use the tooltip instead of the properties tabs on the
right (or vice versa)?  Maybe we can distinguish between different
use cases?


    Heiner

--
    heiner at heiner-lamprecht dot net    GnuPG - Key: 9859E373
  Fingerprint:  3770 7947 F917 94EF 8717 BADB 0139 7554 9859 E373
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 17:43 schrieb Marcel Wiesweg:
>(...)
>
> BTW, in the comments on your screenshot, there is nothing but "0 0 0 0...".
> Is that common with some pictures? Then we should add some code to cut
> whitespace and zeros.
>
> Marcel
>
No, I don't have these comments in pictures downloaded directly with digikam
from Camera to Linux.

I think these 0000's are coming from Canon's Program on a Win98 PC, where I
did some tests with this file, and that program inserted the rubbish (well, I
didn't care, because under Win I was used to the fact that almost every
program does things I haven't asked it to... :-) )

Daniel

--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland
professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com
special interest site: http://www.bauer-nudes.com
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Gilles Caulier-2]

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 18:16, Daniel Bauer a écrit :

> Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 17:43 schrieb Marcel Wiesweg:
> >(...)
> >
> > BTW, in the comments on your screenshot, there is nothing but "0 0 0
> > 0...". Is that common with some pictures? Then we should add some code to
> > cut whitespace and zeros.
> >
> > Marcel
>
> No, I don't have these comments in pictures downloaded directly with
> digikam from Camera to Linux.
>
> I think these 0000's are coming from Canon's Program on a Win98 PC, where I
> did some tests with this file, and that program inserted the rubbish (well,
> I didn't care, because under Win I was used to the fact that almost every
> program does things I haven't asked it to... :-) )
>

Daniel, I have theses zero in my all MRW file comments after an import. It's
not a Canon problem.

I suspect a problem about comments encryption detection into DMetadata class.
Marcel, it's your code (:=)))... Any suggestions ?

Gilles

> Daniel
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Duncan Hill-2]

On Sunday 04 June 2006 16:16, Gilles Caulier wrote:

> Yes, i'm agree with you. There are too informations displayed.
>
> I would to have more viewpoints in this room...

http://www.cricalix.net/digikam/pixmantec_rawshooter.jpg

Rawshooter is one of the other tools I've been using while waiting for
digiKam's raw support to mature.  The interface is unusual, but works fairly
well.

The top portion is obviously the equivalent of the thumbnail directory browser
in digiKam.  Bottom left is the directory navigator, bottom middle is the
real-time rendering area, top right is the real-time adjustments (and the
adjust exposure compensation is a nifty tool), the bottom right is a smaller
version of the image being worked on (when working at magnified levels this
is handy) and a histogram.

As you can see, the barest details about the ISO etc are displayed on the
thumbnail view, and I think that -works-.  digiKam's sidebar(s) contain all
the detail in the world you could ever need, keeping the thumbnail view and
mouseover to the minimum should work quite well.

Options for the thumnail view are very limited in comparison (in Rawshooter)
to digiKam - image, image and information, nothing.

Perhaps the answer is yet-more-customisation :(  I really don't need the file
information on the mouseover - it repeats what the thumbnail container is
already telling me.  Of the photo information, I think things like white
balance and flash could probably go away.

The pure customisation route would be to create several templates for the
thumbnail view:

* minimal
 - Drop the entire File and digiKam segments of the mouseover
 - Limit photo info to date, focal, f-stop, shutter speed, iso, camera model

* minimal + file info
 - Bring back file info

* minimal + digiKam properties

Like Rawshooter, I think the f-stop and shutter speed could very easily be a
combined line.

For new users, default to minimal, but have yet-another-configuration-pane for
adding more information to the mouseover.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Duncan Hill-5]

On Sunday 04 June 2006 16:16, Gilles Caulier wrote:

> Yes, i'm agree with you. There are too informations displayed.
>
> I would to have more viewpoints in this room...

(Sorry if this is a double post, I forgot to set my From properly)

http://www.cricalix.net/digikam/pixmantec_rawshooter.jpg

Rawshooter is one of the other tools I've been using while waiting for
digiKam's raw support to mature.  The interface is unusual, but works fairly
well.

The top portion is obviously the equivalent of the thumbnail directory browser
in digiKam.  Bottom left is the directory navigator, bottom middle is the
real-time rendering area, top right is the real-time adjustments (and the
adjust exposure compensation is a nifty tool), the bottom right is a smaller
version of the image being worked on (when working at magnified levels this
is handy) and a histogram.

As you can see, the barest details about the ISO etc are displayed on the
thumbnail view, and I think that -works-.  digiKam's sidebar(s) contain all
the detail in the world you could ever need, keeping the thumbnail view and
mouseover to the minimum should work quite well.

Options for the thumnail view are very limited in comparison (in Rawshooter)
to digiKam - image, image and information, nothing.

Perhaps the answer is yet-more-customisation :(  I really don't need the file
information on the mouseover - it repeats what the thumbnail container is
already telling me.  Of the photo information, I think things like white
balance and flash could probably go away.

The pure customisation route would be to create several templates for the
thumbnail view:

* minimal
 - Drop the entire File and digiKam segments of the mouseover
 - Limit photo info to date, focal, f-stop, shutter speed, iso, camera model

* minimal + file info
 - Bring back file info

* minimal + digiKam properties

Like Rawshooter, I think the f-stop and shutter speed could very easily be a
combined line.

For new users, default to minimal, but have yet-another-configuration-pane for
adding more information to the mouseover.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Marcel Wiesweg]

> Daniel, I have theses zero in my all MRW file comments after an import.
> It's not a Canon problem.
>
> I suspect a problem about comments encryption detection into DMetadata
> class. Marcel, it's your code (:=)))... Any suggestions ?

According to the debug output by exiv2, its actually the exif user comment
field here that is the problem (file MINOLTA-DYNAX5D-02.MRW from the
repository). It is 64 bytes, only zeros (binary zeroes, 0x00).
Somehow in libexiv2, this gets translated to "0 0 0 ...".

Attached is a patch that takes several parts of the ExifDatum and checks the
size. IMO the correct size for the first and second may be 0 or 64, for the
third and fourth 0, for the fifth 0 or 64, don't know. Output is

getImageComment ExifDatum size 64, Value size 64, CommentValue size 64,
ExifDatum string size 128, Value string size 128, CommentValue string size 0

Marcel

>
> Gilles
>
> > Daniel

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am Sonntag, 4. Juni 2006 18:16 schrieb Heiner Lamprecht:
> On Sunday 04 June 2006 18:07, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> > Well my pending question : some informations need to be removed
> > in tooltip ? If yes, witch ?
>
> I think, to be able to answer this question, we should first talk
> about an other one:  In which situations and for what purpose does
> the user use the tooltip instead of the properties tabs on the
> right (or vice versa)?  

For me one difference between info in tooltip and sidebar is, that for the
tooltips I don't have to click on the picture.

I can leave a picture selected but anyway get some more info about other ones,
like e.g. keywords that don't have enough place to be displayed in the normal
album view (if you have several...). This is a faster approach, so for me
personally it's quite useful.

> Maybe we can distinguish between different
> use cases?
>
>
>     Heiner

--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland
professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com
special interest site: http://www.bauer-nudes.com
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users