Hi,
I know it is possible to use imagecache to create thumbnails, but I find it an unnecessary complication.

Ideally, I would prefer the image cck field to generate thumbnail (with max dimensions) for each image submitted. These thumbnails, could then easily be called from contemplate for example, and included in teaser display.

I'm ready to fund this development up to $200 . If this is not enough, maybe other party interested could add to it.

If interested, please reply or contact me privately.

Cordially,
Brakkar

Comments

dopry’s picture

dopry commented

I've just improved the imagefield/imagecache integration, you can now choose a preset for the teaser and body from the field options page. It will save you the hassle of having to theme in the imagecache preset. If you have gotten imagecache installed and working it should make the job a snap. If that qualifies you can paypal anarch@darkstyles.com. ;). I can probably pull off a static thumbnail if you really, really, really want it.

zach harkey’s picture

zach harkey commented

This is awesome news! Is there any way I can convince you to extend this option to include a preset choice for the admin form? Optically scaling down the original images can really slow down the editing process, especially when you have to wait for 5 or 6 enormous full-res jpegs to load, just to edit a typo. Name your price, dopry, I'm at your mercy.

Robardi56’s picture

Robardi56 commented

Hi,
i'm sorry but this doesn't qualify. The goal for me here is to avoid imagecache install.

Here are some more specifications about what I would like:

- When adding an image field, I can already set image max dimensions. I would like the same settings for thumbnail max dimensions.
- When an image is submitted, it currently adds the image in the file directory, resizes it if necessary, and adds a suffix if an image with same name already exists. Great. Now, I would like that at the same time, it creates the corresponding thumbnail (and add a prefix like thumb_ (and a suffix if thumbnails with same name already exists).
-When a user "uploads" an image, on the form page, instead of showing an optically reduced image, it could show the thumbnail instead.

- Optional: this was not part of initial request and won’t count on the challenge: on the add form, when user checks the box "delete" next to an image, it would be good if the image would “disappear” (and get deleted) without the user need to "submit" the entire form.

Cordially,
Brakkar

Robardi56’s picture

Robardi56 commented

I couldn't edit my last message, but just wanted to add that I appreciate your efforts and work.

Thanks,
Brakkar

mcreature’s picture

mcreature commented

Sounds like what I was envisioning about this morning, but was thinking of a separate image field module that might also utilize the image catch module, as I think that the image catch module is of grate importance for speed and directory versatility. My ideas - "image popup module" admin specifies a node view size and popup size, so for instance each field could be set separately for thumb view = ( page view) and than also a larger popup image. I think this would be a more versatile idea, while keeping the image field module less complicated when all an admin may want is a plain image field, or maybe this could be a pre settings thing and live in the image field module? Though creating other similar modules that work with the image catch module, may make more long term sense, for example on choosing a field an admin may see additional image field types, examples...

image field
Description ....
Allows a user to upload an image of admin specified size

image Popup field
Description ....
Same as image field, but additionally links to a popup image of admin specified size

image Link field
Description ....
Same as image field, but additionally links to a URL or another image

More arguments for having these setting live in a separate module or set of modules..
Additional field’s values would be validated only if field type exists.
More specific image type fields for displaying with views module, thumbs, etc. with out being totaly dependent on image catch module.

If this would work for Brakkar needs, I would also contribute funds = if Dopry or some one ells likes the idea? I could also setup a test site and contribute feedback, bugs, etc.

dopry’s picture

dopry commented

@zack: I'm not sure that I'll be able to use imagecache for the preview...The filepath doesn't really exist per say at that point... I may be able to call imagecache_cache directly. I'll try to play with it next week.

@brakkar: I'm not sure that I will really go that way. Imagecache is pretty easy to install at the moment as long as you have working clean urls and a properly configured filesystem. Most of the issues around it were related to the .htacces file tha drupal was generating in the 4.7.3 release. That has been resolved for 4.7.4.

@mcreature: Sounds like you're thinking of a formatters in cck/views parlance. They can do a lot of what you describe for altering the output of imagefield. You can also use field themes to accomplish a lot.

trunks’s picture

trunks commented

Here we are a new patch to imagefield[1], which enables this module to create thumbnails and improves its web interface usability. If that qualifies you can paypal javier@javierlinares.com :)

[1] http://drupal.org/node/124868

sun’s picture

sun
Primary language German
Location Karlsruhe
commented
Status: Active » Closed (won't fix)

That certainly won't fix in 4.7.x.
Furthermore, Imagefield should not implement functionality that is already provided by Imagecache in a much cleaner and more customizable fashion.