picture preview in open file dialog box

[lucien...@waika9.com]

Hello,

Firefox 78.4.0esr (64 bits) - Debian 10

Someone pointed out this problem in 2016, but it's still present.
When I open a local picture file (jpg, png,...) through Ctrl + O, some files have a preview on the right side of the dialog box, but some others have not.
Those which have no preview have a width greater than 4096 pixels.
Is there a way to increase this limit ?

PS : I think it's Firefox related because this problem does not occurs with Chrome

[lucien...@waika9.com]

No one faces that problem ??

[WaltS48]

Unless I use the "View Image" context menu item on a web page image I'm
not in the habit of using my Firefox as an image viewer.

That's what my Image Viewer application is used for on my system.

What is the bug report number or a link to the 2016 post?

--
OS: Ubuntu Linux 18.04LTS - Gnome Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/

[Dave Royal]

I have a laptop with Debian and Fx 78.4 so so I tried it. In a directory
of random images only one didn't have a preview. The 'file' command
revealed it was a web/p image, vp8 encoded, 600x428px.

I couldn't find any images >4096 wide so I made one with:
convert -resize 5000x3000 in.jpg out.jpg
and I confirm that the file selector has no preview for it. Maybe that's
by design (performance?) maybe it's a bug.

I could't find a bug (I didn't search exhaustively). You should
raise one.

I did find some interesting (and very old) bugs which suggested that on
some operating systems it might use the OS's own thumbnails. But Debian
doesn't have those AFAIK - though some image viewers may create them.
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

[Dave Royal]

On 14 Nov 2020 02:46:16 -0600 Dave Royal wrote:
>[On 4 Nov 2020 08:23:59 -0800 (PST) "lucien... wrote:]

>
>I have a laptop with Debian and Fx 78.4 so so I tried it. In a directory
>of random images only one didn't have a preview. The 'file' command
>revealed it was a web/p image, vp8 encoded, 600x428px.
>
>I couldn't find any images >4096 wide so I made one with:
>convert -resize 5000x3000 in.jpg out.jpg
>and I confirm that the file selector has no preview for it. Maybe that's
>by design (performance?) maybe it's a bug.
>
>I could't find a bug (I didn't search exhaustively). You should
>raise one.
>
>I did find some interesting (and very old) bugs which suggested that on
>some operating systems it might use the OS's own thumbnails. But Debian
>doesn't have those AFAIK - though some image viewers may create them.

BTW, I'm using xfce. I don't know whether this file selector is actually
part of Firefox, or whether it uses xfce's file selector - which is probably
gnome's. I'd look at the file-open dialog for other programs and see whether
it's the same.

[lucien...@waika9.com]

In fact, I'm using a web site (photoweb) which asks to upload pictures ; so I must choose them from Firefox through the dialog box.

[lucien...@waika9.com]

I also use Xfce, and this problem does not occur in Chrome Browser.

[Dave Royal]

> I also use Xfce, and this problem does not occur in Chrome Browser.

I'm now on SuSE, also xfce, which shows the same. And yes, if I create a
file with
convert -resize 4096 image.jpg big.jpg
Fx can see the preview, whereas with
convert -resize 4097 image.jpg big.jpg
it cannot.

And Chromium (I don't have Chrome) /can/ see the bigger one. So it does
seem to be Fx.

If I use Ristretto Image Viewer I get the same selector but without the
preview column. Same with LibreOffice. So it looks like programs can opt
to add that column.

[WaltS48]

On 11/14/20 7:42 AM, lucien...@waika9.com wrote:
> Le vendredi 13 novembre 2020 à 14:21:06 UTC+1, WaltS48 a écrit :
>> On 11/13/20 7:24 AM, lucien...@waika9.com wrote:
>>> Le mercredi 4 novembre 2020 à 17:53:01 UTC+1, lucien...@waika9.com a écrit :
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Firefox 78.4.0esr (64 bits) - Debian 10
>>>>
>>>> Someone pointed out this problem in 2016, but it's still present.
>>>> When I open a local picture file (jpg, png,...) through Ctrl + O, some files have a preview on the right side of the dialog box, but some others have not.
>>>> Those which have no preview have a width greater than 4096 pixels.
>>>> Is there a way to increase this limit ?
>>>>
>>>> PS : I think it's Firefox related because this problem does not occurs with Chrome
>>>
>>>
>>> No one faces that problem ??
>>>
>> Unless I use the "View Image" context menu item on a web page image I'm
>> not in the habit of using my Firefox as an image viewer.
>>
>> That's what my Image Viewer application is used for on my system.
>>
>> What is the bug report number or a link to the 2016 post?
>>

>

> In fact, I'm using a web site (photoweb) which asks to upload pictures ; so I must choose them from Firefox through the dialog box.
>

I see. That wasn't mentioned in the original post.

Thanks for clarifying.

[Jeremy Nicoll]

On Sat, 14 Nov 2020, at 18:17, WaltS48 wrote:
> On 11/14/20 7:42 AM, lucien...@waika9.com wrote:

> > In fact, I'm using a web site (photoweb) which asks to upload pictures ; so I
> > must choose them from Firefox through the dialog box.

> I see. That wasn't mentioned in the original post.

Sorry for replying to Lucien here but I've deleted the earlier post he made...

It doesn't follow that one has to have the preview facility in the dialog box though,
though I can see how some people would find it useful.

I upload things quite often, but before I do that I use my image viewer program
to poke around inside the folders where pictures etc are, and decide which files
to upload. [If needed I make special versions first - eg changing resolution etc, &
blurring private info.]

When the upload process presents its file selector I know which files (by name) I am
going to choose. I've never used the preview in the file selector and it wasn't until
earlier in this thread - when I experimented with FF on Windows 8.1 - that I found
it was possible.

It's also possible in lots of Windows file selectors, dunno about other platforms, to
c&p a full file path into a file selector dialog (where it prompts for a leaf name) and
thus specify a file that isn't even listed in the dialog. I use that facility elsewhere,
when a script I have generates the name of a file & puts the full file path into the
clipboard. When the selector dialog comes up I just paste the full path from the
clipboard into the filename field and click the action button.

--
Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

[Ken Springer]

Also note that a JPG file may included a thumbnail in the file itself.


--
Ken
MacOS 10.14.6
Firefox 73.0.1
Thunderbird 60.9.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

[Dave Royal]

Ken Springer <snow...@q.com> wrote:
> On 11/4/20 9:23 AM, lucien...@waika9.com wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Firefox 78.4.0esr (64 bits) - Debian 10
>>
>> Someone pointed out this problem in 2016, but it's still present.
>> When I open a local picture file (jpg, png,...) through Ctrl + O, some files have a preview on the right side of the dialog box, but some others have not.
>> Those which have no preview have a width greater than 4096 pixels.
>> Is there a way to increase this limit ?
>>
>> PS : I think it's Firefox related because this problem does not occurs with Chrome
>
> Also note that a JPG file may included a thumbnail in the file itself.
>

I didn't know that. I wondered if it could be used as a workaround for
the OP's use case. So I added a thumbnail into the 4097-wide jpg:
convert -resize 100 big.jpg small.jpg
exiftool "-ThumbnailImage<=small.jpg" big.jpg

The file selector in Fx doesn't show it. I wonder what does?

You could obviously embed any image in there as a thumbnail.
When I used to upload pictures for my blog I always used to strip exif
data.

[lucien...@waika9.com]

Yes thanks Jeremy, I understand that.
But it's my wife's computer, and when windows 7 turned out of support, I switched it to Linux, and since that, I regularly come in trouble because things are not like before !

[Ken Springer]

On 11/15/20 3:46 AM, Dave Royal wrote:
> Ken Springer <snow...@q.com> wrote:
>> On 11/4/20 9:23 AM, lucien...@waika9.com wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Firefox 78.4.0esr (64 bits) - Debian 10
>>>
>>> Someone pointed out this problem in 2016, but it's still present.
>>> When I open a local picture file (jpg, png,...) through Ctrl + O, some files have a preview on the right side of the dialog box, but some others have not.
>>> Those which have no preview have a width greater than 4096 pixels.
>>> Is there a way to increase this limit ?
>>>
>>> PS : I think it's Firefox related because this problem does not occurs with Chrome
>>
>> Also note that a JPG file may included a thumbnail in the file itself.
>>
> I didn't know that. I wondered if it could be used as a workaround for
> the OP's use case. So I added a thumbnail into the 4097-wide jpg:
> convert -resize 100 big.jpg small.jpg
> exiftool "-ThumbnailImage<=small.jpg" big.jpg

This is how I would tackle the OP's issue.

1. Mark all his photos read only. I don't know how to do that in Linux.
2. Create a folder for testing the problem. Copy a group of files that
show a thumbnail, and a group of files that do not show a thumbnail,
into the new folder. Note which files show a thumbnail, and which do not.
3. Determine which files in the folder have an embedded thumbnail,
which do not.
4. If the files that show a thumbnail in FF do indeed have an embedded
thumbnail, and he ones that do not show a thumbnail in FF do not have an
embedded thumbnail, it might be a sound conclusion that FF is looking
for an embedded thumbnail.

> The file selector in Fx doesn't show it. I wonder what does?

Not being a Linux user, I can't comment, other than to say I don't use a
browser to view my image files or PDF files.

> You could obviously embed any image in there as a thumbnail.
> When I used to upload pictures for my blog I always used to strip exif
> data.

Just curious, here, but why did you strip the EXIF data? You might have
one or more blog readers that would be interested in some part of the
EXIF data.

[Jeremy Nicoll]

On Sun, 15 Nov 2020, at 17:19, Ken Springer wrote:

> Just curious, here, but why did you strip the EXIF data? You might have
> one or more blog readers that would be interested in some part of the
> EXIF data.

Privacy? EXIF data can eg contain one's location. If a picture is of a
geographical feature that hardly matters, but suppose it's of your cat
in your house. Few of us want to tell people where we live while also
letting them see the inside layout of the house.

You also might not want to share details of the camera, if it was a
pricey one ... especially if you just leaked where it might be found.

[Ken Springer]

Good points. I have no idea what the purpose of Davee's blog is, but if
it's a photography oriented blog, readers might be interested in what
camera and settings were used.

Only Dave knows why he removes it. For the rest of us, it's pure
speculation, unless you personally know him. <G>

[lucien...@waika9.com]

I tried to add a thumbnail through exiftool to a file which is 4608 pixels wide, but even with that, Firefox does not show the preview.

[Dave Royal]

lucien...@waika9.com <lucien...@waika9.com> wrote:
>
> I tried to add a thumbnail through exiftool to a file which is 4608 pixels wide, but even with that, Firefox does not show the preview.

<https://forum.xfce.org/viewtopic.php?id=10133>

You'll have to raise a bug if you care about this:
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/>

[Dave Royal]

Ken Springer <snow...@q.com> wrote:
>
> Just curious, here, but why did you strip the EXIF data? You might have
> one or more blog readers that would be interested in some part of the
> EXIF data.
>

I don't know why I mentioned that. Probably because, when I was
experimenting with these exif thumbnails I was thinking that maybe the
site the OP was uploading to might object to them.

Primarily privacy, fwiw. I didn't want flickr or google (I was uploading
to both) doing anything with the metadata - putting them on a map for
instance.

Also because flickr sometimes auto-rotated the images (especially if
they were from an iphone) and I'd already checked the orientation was
correct before uploading them (via the flickr api over gprs - it was
many years ago).

[Ken Springer]

On 11/16/20 10:17 AM, Dave Royal wrote:
> Also because flickr sometimes auto-rotated the images (especially if
> they were from an iphone) and I'd already checked the orientation was
> correct before uploading them (via the flickr api over gprs - it was
> many years ago).

I hate websites and programmers who assume they know more than you do.

[lucien...@waika9.com]

Thanks Dave.

I found mozilla bug report 1571984 and updated it.

[Dave Royal]

lucien...@waika9.com <lucien...@waika9.com> wrote:
>
> I found mozilla bug report 1571984 and updated it.

<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1571984>
So it's by-design - a 5-year-old kludge to fix a vulnerability which
probably no longer exists - but they're not sure. And they don't think
it's a good idea to pass a big image to the file chooser: well I can see
that, but images this big are not uncommon and the preview /is/ useful.

I read a piece today about KDE, which I haven't looked at for years,
since it got too complicated and heavy for my simple needs:
<https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/16/kde_maintainers_speak_on_why/>
I thought I'd take another look.

I wondered whether that would use a different (qt) file selector - but
I'm not sure it would, or not easily.

I'd just use Chromium for this.