GD, REsource Browser and File Sizes/Image quality.

OK, all you PHP Guru’s and general genius’s. I think I need a little understanding boost when it comes to the way MCPUK and GD interact. I thought that MCPUK used GD to resize images. Well, when an image is resized the image file size in /assets/image/file.name remains the original upload size.

And the graphic quality!!!! Need I say that 2 hours in photoshop to have ugly artifact edges is not optimal... GD has quality settings I beleive is MCPUK using them when it resizes? is MCPUK storing a temporary version created on the fly on php page generation....


These things I ponder as I attempt to sleep the sleep of the good.


JT

The image editor in the resource browser isn’t really the best. Sure, it does the job...but it’s certainly not the most intuitive and easiest to use. And, yeah, the output can be a little tricky. This is one of the things that we’re looking forward to greatly improving. Unfortunately though, short of a complete solution being custom written, there are very few worthy solutions right now that can easily be integrated into MODx. I’m still looking and still experimenting with alot of ideas but for the moment...well...guess we’re stuck with what we have! The goal will be to have a better solution implemented in time for the 1.0 release though.

Ya I read ya. Does MCPUK in fact use GD? If it does I can start hacking and see if I can pass quality parameters or something. As it stands now it does not look like images are acctually "resized" at all. As the file size remains the same.

Yeah, by default, the Image Manager (which is a separate app from the MCPUK browser) uses GD for image manipulation. I’ve been keeping tabs on this website (http://fckeditor.prosjektweb.net/) which has a slightly updated version of the image manager. The file browser part hasn’t really changed...but the image manager has to some degree. Haven’t tested it though.

Keep in mind that we’re working on getting the resource browser replaced with a more worthwhile solution. However, it’s looking like whatever we switch to might not have any image editing capabilities initially, mainly because most of the solutions that do have image editing capabilities are pretty lackluster at best. That could change though and I would like to see something that’s easy to use, stable, and light on code as well. Guess we’ll see what happens!