 | Anatoliy Zachynskiy 2/12/2009 12:37:58 PM You can load pictures in fields type="File Attachement".
But you can not manage (control) size of pictures in preview-mode (in a form for record with some pictures).
For example, to **align by height or by width**. In this case (alignment) some pictures will look more nice.
Or set **size of frame in pixels** or mm?
|
 | carlos lopez 1/27/2010 8:21:20 PM I would like to have my records shown in form view appart from list or table, so that someone interested in one of the r ecords content could see the complete information, including pictures, i.e., a Real Estate database with an option to print or send that complete form by email. I think that this issue is a must because if its not possible, then the system isn't useful for me at all
|
 | FCI ADMIN 9/26/2010 9:51:03 AM Allow user to resize images in fields. It would help in the case users can take any images and display in documents without manual adjustment.
|
 | Kirill Bondar 10/5/2011 7:10:49 AM Sometimes I think there is a collective unconscious - after a long silence both points were raised in a support desk few times during the last weeks. I also thought of something like this to control image appearance in a context of documents.
----
I do not know if percentages are really useful: images may vary in size and 50% of large image may render small image unreadable. Also, I do not think width and height parameters should specify **exact** thumbnail size.
I'd rather vote for letting user be able to specify either width or height or both. This will define a bounding box. The thumbnail will preserve aspect ratio of the original image and will be resized not to exceed bounding box dimension(s).
Comments?
|
| Kirill Bondar 10/5/2011 7:12:24 AM To the last post: no image upscaling ever. If bounding box is 100x100 and the image is 16x16 the thumbnail will be 16x16
|
 | Rick Cogley 10/5/2011 7:32:11 AM Thank you for your consideration, Kirill. There may well be a collective unconscious! Very interesting indeed.
Yes, upscaling would not work.
Understood on the percentages. If you used them, you would have to have some algorithm that protected people from themselves, which would be a pain. Absolute sizes of the bounding box in px will work fine, I think.
|
 | Gii Systems 10/17/2011 4:44:36 AM The ability to use the image in documents will be a great help.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/22/2011 5:34:56 AM Merged with:
246 - Attachment: Size of pictures
|
 | Shem Sargent 12/30/2011 9:52:14 AM @Kirill, I agree with your take on the bounding box functionality. I also agree with Rick regarding an option to remove the download link when "Display Images" is selected in the Column definition. I would like to be able to select whether the download link appears on Views, Forms in view mode, or Forms in Edit mode.
|
| Kirill Bondar 2/21/2012 11:02:01 AM Stage 1 is implemented.
Now you can remove file name for an image in lists and specify two relative image sizes, one for lists and one for forms: small, medium, large and x-large. Column defaults are "medium medium", to replicate prior functionality. "Small" is half of the "medium"; "large" is 2x medium and "x-large" is 4x medium. At the moment medium is rendered to 100px square box for lists and 240px square box for forms.
Relative sizes (vs. pixels) were choosen to allow as some flexibility while rendering on devices with various DPI settings. For example, physical size of 300x300px image on a typical screen is about 80x80mm; on a tablet featuring higher density display it's about 60x60mm; on an an hi-density smartphone as well as on a jet printer the same image will be rendered to 26x26mm box.
|
| Rick Cogley 2/22/2012 8:34:58 PM Kirill, thank you and your colleagues for your diligent and continual work. It is a pleasure to use your system.
|
| Shem Sargent 2/23/2012 6:45:46 AM @Kirill, This is a very nice improvement. Thank you!
|
 | Martin Odendaal 3/13/2012 3:19:54 AM Thanks for this so far.
Is there any way we could look at getting the geotag (exif/metadata) to be extracted and available for mapping?
|
 | Dale Oliver 3/15/2012 6:56:21 AM This would help a great deal as we generate a great deal of documents that make use of images.
|
 | martin oliver 5/17/2013 2:21:37 PM Barcode generators via URL
i.e "http://www.bcgen.com/Demo/linear-dbgs.aspx?D=" & URLDecode([Manifest Number])
Function in TeamDesk except when having to print a "Word" document" where the resultant code prints but is very small and requires altering the size on each document to make it readable. This is obviously impractical as is very time consuming. I assume that their are many applications where barcodes can be used and a solution to this would be very helpful.
|
 | Robert Gustavsson 5/18/2013 8:26:33 PM I noticed too that images come out *very* small in the Word document. Is there any way to correct this?
|
| Kirill Bondar 5/19/2013 3:14:00 AM Merged with:
369 - Resize image
|
| Kirill Bondar 5/19/2013 3:14:53 AM Merged with:
641 - Barcodes
|
| Dale Oliver 10/18/2013 1:41:01 PM A work-around for the barcoding issue is to use a barcode font installed on each users pc. This way the text is converted to a barcode and there is no need to worry about resizing the barcode image. Resizing images won't work as word has a bug with regards to resizing merged images in docx files (so INCLUDEPICTURE command doesn't work), also if manually resized it would be nearly impossible to get the correct aspect ratio, which would render the barcode unscanable. The following font worked for me, after trying many barcode fonts: http://www.fonts2u.com/download/bar-code-39.font |
| Dale Oliver 10/18/2013 1:54:44 PM Another feature I would love to see is Barcode/OCR recognition capability with regards to file attachments. The way this could work is to use a table with a bulk document upload tool, where all documents could be uploaded to a "processing" table and a time trigger would run a script and scan these attachments through a barcode recognition API (that would identify barcodes of the Unique Record ID's (i.e. pdf/tiff files uploaded). The barcodes on the attachments would be identical to a unique table record IDs (internal document numbers, invoice number, delivery note number etc). These file attachments (pdf files etc.) in the processing table could be processed at a set time time daily, if the barcode recognition is successful the attachment would be moved and attached to the record that has the same unique ID. This way attachments could be linked to the records that they belong to with minimal effort (i.e. instead attaching one document at a time per record, which is cumbersome).
|
| Dale Oliver 10/18/2013 1:56:44 PM |
 | Paul O'Brien 10/24/2013 8:35:56 AM While you are working on Attachment columns, how about making the GetAttachment and GetAttachmentInfo methods work for Lookup fields that are Attachments. The work around requires you to know what table the image is coming from as well as setting up an additional id lookup field which makes writing generic code to access these fields pretty much impossible. Seems like this should be transparent.
|
| Gii Systems 10/25/2013 8:27:10 AM RE images: I need the ability to extract the Image Metadata (Time/Date Stamp) or even the GPS coordinates from an image file in some way. Maybe it can even be placed as a watermark on the image on the server side?
|
| martin oliver 10/29/2013 1:24:12 PM Please advise the scope of the development is on this as there are various ideas contained in this thread
|
| Gii Systems 11/7/2013 1:09:00 AM Same Question as Robert:
Robert Gustavsson 5/18/2013 8:26:33 PM
I noticed too that images come out *very* small in the Word document. Is there any way to correct this?
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/25/2013 6:40:05 AM Attachment columns' images are now embedded into the document. They follow the same logic of thumbnails generation - main record respects "Form size" setting while detail records respect "List size".
|
| Dale Oliver 11/25/2013 6:56:45 AM Perfect now
|
| Gii Systems 11/25/2013 7:18:35 AM Thanks Kirill! Love it.
|
| Robert Gustavsson 11/25/2013 9:28:57 AM The images look blurred and are not suitable for printing. Can we disable this modification?
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/25/2013 10:23:11 AM @Robert - we are working to improve image quality when downscaling the image. As a workaround, please increase attachment column's thumbnail size properties to avoid downscaling.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/27/2013 5:42:24 AM Now we are embedding images not only from Attachment columns but from URL / Formula - URL columns and markup.
Also, to control image size in documents we've added new #ps suffix. You can specify dimensions of the image's bounding box either in #ps<number><unit> (to create square box) or #ps<number>x<number><unit> format. Here, the <number> is positive floating point number and unit is either in, cm, mm, pt or px.
The image will be downscaled proportionally to fit the box, no upscaling is performed.
For example to fit a photo into 2.5x2.5cm box use the following:
{ MERGEFIELD Photo#ps2.5cm }
to fit a photo into 100x200px box use
{ MERGEFIELD Photo#ps100x200px }
|
| Robert Gustavsson 11/27/2013 7:43:09 AM Unfortunately MS Word reports "can not open <filename> because there was a problem with the content". Unidentified error in /Word/document.xml row 1 column 0. The document can however be opened after 2 additional clicks.
|
| Rick Cogley 11/27/2013 7:44:47 AM I tried it too, in Mac Word 2011 running on OS X Mavericks, and it works fine, and I am getting no error like Robert is.
I have to resize the images down just a bit, but, it is much easier than before. Thanks!
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/27/2013 8:15:56 AM @Robert - Word requires to generate unique id for each picture and id generated by us was overlapping with id of the picture in your document. Fixed now.
|
| Robert Gustavsson 11/27/2013 8:31:23 AM Fixed indeed! Looking forward to non-blurred images.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/27/2013 8:37:40 AM |
| Robert Gustavsson 11/27/2013 8:43:45 AM The image sizes have been adapted already in my document according to the format described in that link, but for an image-url, there is no way of reducing blurriness by changing thumbnail size, is there?
|
| Robert Gustavsson 11/27/2013 8:46:47 AM By the way, even the (uploaded) logo on the top left corner of every screen always looked blurred.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/27/2013 9:43:32 AM Downscaling always decreases the quality of the image - unless it is done with pro-grade image editor. Yet, we do not touch the image if it fits into the box.
In your case URLs point to various APIs, and it looks like all APIs allow you to specify desired output size - I guess you may try to decrease the size of the image you are requesting. Or you can specify the box large enough to ensure we won't downscale the image we get from the URL.
|
| Kirill Bondar 11/28/2013 7:56:08 AM @Robert - we no longer downscale and resample app/workspace logos if they fit into 300x100 box and are in JPEG format. You may want to re-upload your app logo.
|
| Rick Cogley 11/28/2013 3:58:31 PM I re-uploaded our app logo, and indeed, it looks cleaner now. Thanks!
|
 | basenine 11/28/2013 4:15:43 PM Same here - much clearer+1
|
| Robert Gustavsson 12/5/2013 8:18:03 AM Actually downscaling should increase the quality of the image in terms of pixels per inch. Before this adaptation an image could be made more clear by the fact it usually was printed smaller than the original source. Some APIs I use already deliver low grade images which are unfortunately further degraded by the downscaling process in TD.
|
| Robert Gustavsson 1/24/2014 11:53:05 AM Any news about image blur in documents? What is determining the low DPI of the images?
|
| Kirill Bondar 1/27/2014 7:40:24 AM @Robert: JPEG and PNG images have DPI information embedded in the image and we use this information to determine image size in the document. If, say, 1000x1000px 1000dpi JPEG should be fit to 1x1 inch placeholder we won't perform any downscaling and embed picture in the document as is.
|
