Why does slideshow not start out full screen?

[jfriend]

Why does the full screen slideshow not show a full screen image until somewhere between the third and fifth image in the show? The first few always seem to start out smaller than my window. Then, eventually it adjusts and fills my screen.

If you want to see an example, go here (http://jfriend.smugmug.com/gallery/3310407_yrMxm#184776831_HkKEV) and hit the slideshow button.

[Andy]

Why does the full screen slideshow not show a full screen image until somewhere between the third and fifth image in the show? The first few always seem to start out smaller than my window. Then, eventually it adjusts and fills my screen.

If you want to see an example, go here (http://jfriend.smugmug.com/gallery/3310407_yrMxm#184776831_HkKEV) and hit the slideshow button.

Because we get a pre-made (L, XL, X2, X3) size first. Then, we determine how much size "full screen" is (it's different based on your monitor) ... then we start calculating, and as soon as we can (based on speed) we serve up the largest size we can, and it's a custom rendered size. This is all done to serve you the best, biggest, and fastest show possible - on a tiny 12" monitor or a huge 30" monitor.

Does this help?

[dennismullen]

Because we get a pre-made (L, XL, X2, X3) size first. Then, we determine how much size "full screen" is (it's different based on your monitor) ... then we start calculating, and as soon as we can (based on speed) we serve up the largest size we can, and it's a custom rendered size. This is all done to serve you the best, biggest, and fastest show possible - on a tiny 12" monitor or a huge 30" monitor.

Does this help?

It still seems like starting the slideshow on a sour note. Usually you put your best photo first. I'd rather have the slideshow wait till the first picture is ready. Maybe an option for a picture to be used as a slideshow cover while we're waiting.

[Andy]

It still seems like starting the slideshow on a sour note. Usually you put your best photo first. I'd rather have the slideshow wait till the first picture is ready. Maybe an option for a picture to be used as a slideshow cover while we're waiting.
It's a tough balancing act. Far and away the majority of folks want something on the screen - fast - and waiting any number of seconds longer would / could result in folks hitting the [x] button and bailing.

[jfriend]

It still seems like starting the slideshow on a sour note. Usually you put your best photo first. I'd rather have the slideshow wait till the first picture is ready. Maybe an option for a picture to be used as a slideshow cover while we're waiting.

Great idea. I agree that the "full screen" slideshow gets off to a disappointing start. And, first impressions are everything. Obviously, you don't want it to take forever to load on a blank screen either so maybe some ability to have a "spash" image that isn't full screen and would load quickly kind of like you do with the homepage slideshow. But, then when the real slideshow starts, they are all full screen.

[dennismullen]

Still looking for that "random order" option all good slideshow software offers.

[hyachts]

It's a tough balancing act. Far and away the majority of folks want something on the screen - fast - and waiting any number of seconds longer would / could result in folks hitting the [x] button and bailing.

I have to say I'm in this camp - faster is better even if the first image or two are undersized. A splash image might be OK, but I guess I don't really understand why that's better than just having the slideshow images undersized at first, since the splash would necessarily have to be hard-sized to something that would fit on the smallest screen (unless I'm missing something).

[jfriend]

I have to say I'm in this camp - faster is better even if the first image or two are undersized. A splash image might be OK, but I guess I don't really understand why that's better than just having the slideshow images undersized at first, since the splash would necessarily have to be hard-sized to something that would fit on the smallest screen (unless I'm missing something).

As a viewer, the current behavior looks like a bug to me. It's inconsistent (sometimes one under-sized image, sometimes as many as three). It sometimes occurs more than once in the show (perhaps when it encounters a different orientation image - I don't know). It's an odd looking size. It just doesn't look polished. That's my opinion. I believe there are better technical solutions that don't have this lack of polish if a smart person wanted to solve this problem.

[Andy]

I believe there are better technical solutions that don't have this lack of polish if a smart person wanted to solve this problem.
Appreciate the input, John.

It is not a bug, and Shizam and {JT} are supremely smart sorcerers, thanks. We will always be looking for the best solution, one that balances function and performance.

[hyachts]

As a viewer, the current behavior looks like a bug to me. It's inconsistent (sometimes one under-sized image, sometimes as many as three). It sometimes occurs more than once in the show (perhaps when it encounters a different orientation image - I don't know). It's an odd looking size. It just doesn't look polished. That's my opinion. I believe there are better technical solutions that don't have this lack of polish if a smart person wanted to solve this problem.

I've seen it do it in the middle of a show as well. My assumption is that there's some timeout value after which it will just serve a pre-sized image rather than waiting for a custom one. I haven't paid close enough attention to it to notice if it was on orientation changes, but I don't think so right off. I hear you, I guess for my purposes I'd just rather it launch into the show ASAP.

[jfriend]

Appreciate the input, John.

It is not a bug, and Shizam and {JT} are supremely smart sorcerers, thanks. We will always be looking for the best solution, one that balances function and performance.

Andy, I'm not saying that your guys aren't smart. I'm providing feedback that I disagree with the way they chose to solve this problem and I'm trying to challenge them to find a better way to solve it that doesn't suffer this lack of polish. Certainly, you have to agree that this doesn't look as polished as we all wish it did?

[Andy]

I'm providing feedback that I disagree with the way they chose to solve this problem and I'm trying to challenge them to find a better way to solve it that doesn't suffer this lack of polish.
Thanks for the feedback. Do you have a better way? :ear

[Andy]

Certainly, you have to agree that this doesn't look as polished as we all wish it did?

You call it lack of polish - I'll call it a fact of digital life. You're serving up a variably sized (potentially huge!) image to a variably sized endpoint (1024px up to 2560px res and more). And people want those first images fast.

We're doing everything possible to balance all of this and get a fast-appearing, smooth and fast-running slideshow.

Thanks!

[dennismullen]

Thanks for the feedback. Do you have a better way? :ear

Yes, The idea given of an option to have a picture as a "splash screen" till the first picture in the slideshow is ready.
It doesn't have to be enabled if the site owner doesn't want it.