Maximum picture size help text in profile no longer needed

The maximum width and height dimensions still apply when there is no image library installed (see user_validate_picture()). Maybe we could detect if an image library is present and inform the user their picture will automatically be resized to dimension x and y, otherwise the text is displayed as it presently is.

I didn't even know we could run without an image library installed. Is that a valid scenario, or more of a left-over from the Drupal 4.5 era? If possible, I'd prefer having one way of doing things, rather than having a new and old way of doing things.

I am all for a image-toolkit-only system. But I am a bit concerned that that will rule out a lot of people who have no access to the server/php set up.

So, would it be worth it, for sake of usability and ease-of use to demand a toolkit for thumbs, and leave those who have no server softwar efor hendling images without avatars?

-1 on this.

For one thing, it still makes sense to inform people what the maximum avatar size is. Don't underestimate how many avatars are custom made for a particular site.

Secondly, it is important to know the maximum size for animated avatars... if they go over the maximum size, they are resized and come out as static images. Without this info you would need trial and error to figure it out.

You can use image_get_toolkit() to check if an image library is installed. Here's some sample code taken from user.module.

if (image_get_toolkit()) { // Imaging library exists
  image_scale($file->filepath, $file->filepath, $maxwidth, $maxheight);
}

Once the profile help text is based on the existence of an image library, this patch would be good to go.

You can use image_get_toolkit() to check if an image library is installed. Here's some sample code taken from user.module.

if (image_get_toolkit()) { // Imaging library exists
  image_scale($file->filepath, $file->filepath, $maxwidth, $maxheight);
}

Once the profile help text is based on the existence of an image library, this patch would be good to go.

+1 for this patch and the additional help text it provides.

The patch applies and works.

But I find the text: Your image will be automatically resized to fit the maximum dimension of 100x100 and maximum file size of 200 k
strange. how can something be resized under the maximum file size of 200 k ?

On second thought: I (personally) dislike giving this kind of information. These are exactly the texts that scare people away, or at least make them not even read a text.

But I will not object against this patch on that basis, since I can change it, using locales. I will change it to "If your image is too big, it will be resized". For me, that is more then enought information. And for Joe Average it s too.

I agree with Ber, there is no need to scare or bore end users with this kind of info.

Here is what I want you to do: go for a image toolkit only approach -- that is what we introduced toolkits for. If I'm not mistaken, there are several toolkits available in contrib so people should be able to find a working toolkit.

This means, you'll have to simplify/test user_validate_picture() and the surrounding code. While testing, I'd modify image_get_toolkit() to return NULL to 'simulate' the absense of a toolkit.

Can you investigate that?

nysus: mainly you but also the other developers who want to see this fixed.

patching file user.module
Hunk #1 FAILED at 241.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 1161.
2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file user.module.rej

This feature request is it still valid ?

here's a current version of this.

Works like a charm, but has a different approach then #20. Was that intentionally (there have of course been some changes since 2005)?

I think the easier solution would be to not allow the site admin to enable user pictures if there is no image toolkit. I'd like to incorporate this issue into #305802: Improve default user picture interface since this issue seems like it's lost it's steam.

Dave Reid, no need to take such a simple help fix off topic. don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. if i've got a single user site and i want my account to have a picture but don't have gd, it's much simpler for me to just scale one image by hand than to recompile php.

Whoops. Sorry drewish! I'll continue in my issue and not bother you again here. :)

No longer fails locally, so resetting.

While we're here, can we split that really long array into multiple lines?

Reroll per #30.
And I unassigned Steve, because he hasn't been in this thread since 2005.

Just stumbled on this. Here's my own wording change.

Do we even need the "max size" limitation in the admin interface any more?

+++ modules/user/user.module
@@ -1115,7 +1115,7 @@ function user_account_form(&$form, &$form_state) {
+    '#description' => t('Your virtual face or picture. You may upload larger pictures, but they will be resized to %dimensions pixels.', array('%dimensions' => variable_get('user_picture_dimensions', '85x85'))) . ' ' . filter_xss_admin(variable_get('user_picture_guidelines', '')),

Larger than what?

Better wording something like:

'Your virtual face or picture. Pictures larger than %dimensions pixels will be scaled to fit.'

Powered by Dreditor.

Marked as dup #464688: Clearer labelling of 'Picture maximum dimensions' in profile

Here's another round with improved text - thanks, @joachim.

I did some study and debugging, and here's the scoop:

1. If the image library works at all (or even seems to work) then an upload image is downsized (if necesssary) to the provided image dimensions *before* the file size is checked.

2. The file size limit is therefore basically irrelevant or at least misleading, as long as it's properly proportional to the image dimensions. It's misleading for us to even call it the "file upload size" limit, when it's actually the "after resizing image size".

This text attempts to deal with those facts as well as it can. It would not be unreasonable to completely remove the image file size settings in the admin interface, since we do assume that a system with a broken image library is a broken system.

Maximum allowed file size for uploaded pictures. On a normal working system this only needs to be large enough for a file of size implied by "Picture upload dimensions" above because larger files will be rescaled to the dimensions above.'

This is kinda scary. How do I know if my system is 'normal working'??
And it's also a lot of verbiage to say the obvious -- of COURSE the dimensions restriction acts too.

Compare with the description text on image field size setting:

Enter a value like "512" (bytes), "80 KB" (kilobytes) or "50 MB" (megabytes) in order to restrict the allowed file size. If left empty the file sizes will be limited only by PHP's maximum post and file upload sizes (current limit 32 MB).

Your virtual face or picture. Pictures larger than @dimensions pixels will be scaled down to @dimensions.'

That's pretty ugly with the dimensions string twice.

Would this do?

'Your virtual face or picture. Pictures larger than @dimensions pixels will be scaled down to fit.'

We probably need to get this going. It's a tiny patch, shouldn't take that much work to get it RTBC. Doesn't deserve *so* much conversation. @joachim, do you want to roll a version with the text the way you'd like it?

OK, I think this takes people's comments into account.

Let's get this silly thing done. If you want something different, post a patch. Otherwise, let's get it done.

Looks good.

A much clear. Let's RTBC this.

Committed to CVS HEAD. Thanks.