- Navigate to a folder with videos.
- Set the filter to videos (using the mini-toolbar button).
- Navigate to a folder containing images and videos (jpgs, etc).
Thumbs for images will appear in the browser, even though filter is set to videos. A second or two later, the filter is applied and browser switches to video thumbs only.
The bug is that it takes too long to apply the filter when navigating folders. There are two refreshes, one to display all files, then one to display the results of the filter. This happens after entering any folder.
When a filter is set (such as to videos only), then thumbs excluded by the filter should never appear, even during navigation.
MP 0.20 Win: Filter slow to apply
Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview, Dreamer
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
-
- Author of XnView
- Posts: 44920
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
- Location: France
Re: MP 0.20 Win: Filter slow to apply
Like XnView 1.96.x?
I can't know before checking the header which files are videos or images?
I can't know before checking the header which files are videos or images?
Pierre.
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
Re: MP 0.20 Win: Filter slow to apply
It looks like this is what happens:
1. User selects filter (for instance: videos)
2. Browser "calculates" filter
3. Browser refreshes the thumb display (showing filtered files only)
4. User navigates to a different folder
5. Browser refreshes the thumb display (showing all files)
6. Browser "calculates" previously selected filter
7. Browser refreshes the thumb display (for filtered files only).
It seems slower than 1.96.x. The amount of time between 5 and 7, of course, is dependent on the number of files in the folder and whether thumbs have been built for that folder yet. For a previously unvisited folder (no thumbs built yet) and lots of files in that folder, the time between 5 and 7 is distractingly long. So long that there is occasionally sufficient time between 5 and 7 for me to select (and view!) a thumb that does not meet the filter criteria.
If a filter is already set, then step 5 should not occur. IMO, it would be better if a self-closing alert displayed "Filtering..." (or something like that) at step 5.
1. User selects filter (for instance: videos)
2. Browser "calculates" filter
3. Browser refreshes the thumb display (showing filtered files only)
4. User navigates to a different folder
5. Browser refreshes the thumb display (showing all files)
6. Browser "calculates" previously selected filter
7. Browser refreshes the thumb display (for filtered files only).
It seems slower than 1.96.x. The amount of time between 5 and 7, of course, is dependent on the number of files in the folder and whether thumbs have been built for that folder yet. For a previously unvisited folder (no thumbs built yet) and lots of files in that folder, the time between 5 and 7 is distractingly long. So long that there is occasionally sufficient time between 5 and 7 for me to select (and view!) a thumb that does not meet the filter criteria.
If a filter is already set, then step 5 should not occur. IMO, it would be better if a self-closing alert displayed "Filtering..." (or something like that) at step 5.
John