John's Adventures Forum » Support (John's Background Switcher)
Feature Request: Folder by Folder Picture Mode
(19 posts) (3 voices)-
In the thread at http://johnsadventures.com/forum/topic.php?id=860 the original poster was wanting to have nature photos cropped one way and people cropped another. You rightfully pointed out that JBS can't tell if it's a picture of a person.
Personally I want to be able to have nature photos full screen and people montaged.
Could both possibly be handled by allowing each folder to have its own picture mode? (Unless I'm missing something... all "Folder" entries share a picture mode) Then C:\Wallpapers\Nature could be set to "Scale and Crop" and C:\Wallpapers\FamilyPhotos to "Create a Polaroid Pile" and C:\Wallpapers\Celebs to "Vignette"
Just a thought/wish... Thanks for the AWESOME program!
Matt
-
It's a tricky one. Back in version 3.6 you could choose the size mode for each individual picture and that was great if you only used locally sourced pictures. If you also used folders and Flickr photos then that started to become horribly confusing, particularly now that you can have lots of different pictures sets all at once.
So if you could choose the size mode for each folder then what does that mean for the 'Picture mode' drop down list (or if you're setting a different picture mode for each source then that dialog)? Suddenly the UI starts to get more cluttered and less clear about what's going on so that users get confused.
Of course that's not your problem to solve it's mine! Giving more finely-tuned control is something I want to do it's just I've not figured out a nice way to do it as yet. However I'll do my best! :)
And you're most welcome!
-
What about something like this when set to use individual modes... (A quick mockup)
-
First thing is that mockup infers that you're only choosing your background from a single folder at a time. So if you had one folder showing a postcard pile and the other scaling to fit the screen, then that doesn't work, so you can only have a single folder at a time.
The main problem though is that people get confused very easily when the UI radically changes and is inconsistent across those changes (believe me, that's why I dropping letting you change each individual picture's display mode when I made 4.0 - it was a huge cause of confusion). So take for example what happens when a user wants to use a single picture mode across all sources. Now the background is no longer restricted to choosing from a single set at a time as it would be above, but there's no way for them to know that by looking at the dialog - so they'll not necessarily get what they expect. Also, the UI will look completely different as they don't have the drop-down list by each picture set.
Next, as soon as you have loads of picture sets people will want to be able to set them all at once - which means cluttering up the UI even more.
As I've mentioned before on other posts, I'd rather put more effort into making JBS smart enough to size the pictures accordingly rather than making you define them all yourself. JBS knows how big your screens are, how big the picture is and what the orientation is, so if it can look at each one individually and figure out the optimal way to show it, then that makes the UI nice and simple as it is today and you don't even have to think about it because JBS will always make the right choice for you.
-
maybe it would be better to let the user choose sources per mode,
rather than mode for each source.(kinda hard to explain what i mean, maybe i should do mockup too)
-
made a mockup to explain what i meant. i hope it's clear enough.
basically, grouping by modes replaces grouping by source type. you can add the same source to different modes, enabling you to make it two-mode random, or you can add a source to the real random mode. also you can join different source types for a montage etc. (not sure if that's a good idea)
of course, that's not all of it. i have a picture in my head how it all works out, more or less, just too tired to make mockups to everything.
a second method would be to use groups, added by the user:
not too complicated, the user can create their own groups (or sets) that contain multiple sources, so you can configure a group at once, and not lots of individual sources. less of a radical change than the first one, but still helps in using different mode for the same source type.
sorry for interfering, hope it helps some.;)
-
Thanks for your thoughts and the mockups!
The trouble is that what happens when JBS switches your background? Does it choose a single 'picture source' or 'group' and select picture sets from there? If so that means it'll have to be able to handle choosing from multiple sources at a time (which it can't currently). That's ok as it's on my to-do list anyway.
The main problem comes when someone wants to have the same as JBS currently allows - a picture mode per source (eg. Facebook photos are postcard piles, Flickr photos are scaled to fill the screen, etc.). What happens when they upgrade and want the same behaviour? No matter which way you look at it you (or rather I) have to make a decision about how you (the user) uses JBS and the simplest way to present that in the UI. It's the old line about not being able to please all the people all the time. However I'll definitely keep in mind what you're saying as I like the 'group / set' idea rather a lot!
-
I'll try to answer your questions, per method (a either method has different answers).
>>what happens when JBS switches your background?
- for groups/sets:
remember that you can do multiple random choices.
so, choose random group, then if it has more than one source type, choose random source type.
alternative: allow grouping of only same source type.
(or you could implement handling multiple source types)for modes:
choose random mode, then if it has more than one source type, choose random source type. (or implement handling multiple source types)
random is a mode-group on it's own, so if random is chosen, another random choice is made. (i.e: which mode-group? rand()>>random. which mode to apply? rand()>>polaroid. etc.)>>what when someone wants to have a picture mode per source?
- why would anyone want that? groups are much better. especially when it comes to computer folders. folders can contain different types of images, e.g:
i might want to have family pictures from facebook, picasa and a folder to crate a postcard pile, and landscape photos from flickr, google and a folder to full-screen background.
there's no advantage in mode per source type, as same result can be achieved by groups/modes with a bit more work, and i assume people who want it are a minority anyway.that is, except for this one big case:
>>What happens when they upgrade and want the same behavior?
- well, that's more of a problem, as people upgrading don't want to reconfigure anything. so:
for groups/sets:
when upgrading, create a group for each source type (with a similar name, but add some text i.e Group of facebook photos) and transfer the mode settings to that group, leading to seamless upgrade. then, when the user wants to add a source, they will get to know the new method.
if even that's too much for the poor upgrading user, you can leave the old behavior by default, and add another option (one mode for all/mode per source type/mode per group), which will make the transition.for modes:
most probably should add another option (one mode for all/mode per source type/sources per mode). transition between them should be simple, except for losing your settings when switching back an forth - unless you choose to keep them. but that problem exists in the current two-choice (one mode for all/mode per source type)if you don't want to add another option (seeing that settings is too cluttered already) then maybe i give up modes.
for UI presentation, I think I can make it work to please most people most of the time ;) I'll try to make some more mockups later to fill the blanks.
p.s. just a little UI idea for now (that would also work for current ver.):
when on mode-per-sourcetype (or group), add text to make it clear which mode each sourcetype uses.
e.g Folders on your computer (Current mode: Postcard pile)
-
Heh heh, the first rule of software development should be: any time you find yourself thinking "why would anybody want to do it this way? I'll change it to do it that way, it's much better" then stop because you're wrong! People really hate change and you have to be very careful with every layer of abstraction you add to a UI as it can over-complicate things for the vast majority of people who're not interested in that abstraction.
I'm more convinced by creating collections of picture sets and be able to set the picture mode for each set. That way by default there's no set, so things are as they are now. But if you create a set (maybe you want to be able to switch between Summer and Winter sets) then you can create a new collection and that's fine. You can then set the picture mode for each collection.
The trouble comes where you want to do something simpler. So somebody wants to choose from National Geographic photos from a Google search (and wants them full screen) and their friends Facebook photos (which they want as a postcard pile). Now if picture mode is set on a per-collection basis, then you've got to create 2 sets (Google and Facebook searches) and then 2 collections which seems over-complex - particularly if someone wants a set from each possible source and shown differently. It's a lot of extra work for no gain. Sure, I could then revert to picture modes per source (rather than collection) but that means the UI itself is changing depending on what you've got in the list and that really confuses people. You wouldn't believe how many people get confused when they switch from a single picture mode for all to a picture mode per source and they want to get back again, I don't want to make that worse.
As I say though, I think collections definitely has potential.
-
If you're interested I'll add you to my beta testers list so you can have an early look at / influence on the next version when I start implementing it. Let me know!
-
well, whatever. your software, your rules. I just hope you'll find way to implement it to your liking.
that's said, i don't agree with your stance of "Don't change because people hate changes". (and here was supposed to come a long rant with examples to explain why, but i'll leave it for now)
rather, JBS is so full of options to reserve the behavior people got used to, that it became hell to the new user. what it really need is full UI redesign and cleanup, and if someone likes the older version better, they can stay at it.same goes for the mode per source-type option. it added at least as much complication as groups/sets would have, while adding only a little freedom, helping only very specific cases. i would replace it, but no, some people might have got used to it.
well, that option exist only for a short time anyway, so anyone who got used to it so quickly, will get used to the new one, especially if done right...(i should note, i don't really need these features. just trying to help. i'll be quiet now.)
-
wait, aren't i already in your beta list? or is it a new list for each version?
-
Please don't take offence, I'm just explaining what my thought process is when changing functionality and introducing new features. Bear in mind when I introduce a change that confuses people I'm the one who has to deal with the deluge of emails repeating the same thing over and over again until I realise that it's actually my fault for thinking something seemed logical to people but was actually logical to me but not others. It's a tricky balancing act and having people beta testing radical changes has opened my eyes over the years to what does and doesn't work.
I did a large redesign for JBS 4.0 which took several years of feedback into what worked, what didn't and what was confusing to produce the UI you see now. I didn't just throw it together, a great deal of thought and usability testing went into it and if I seem like I'm being hard above it's because that's the level of scrutiny I apply to everything I do in JBS which hopefully results in it being a simple application to use.
I wouldn't describe the current version as "hell to a new user" though - 3.6 maybe as I had a lot of feedback from people who didn't even know where to begin. I don't get that type of feedback any more so I'm happy it's easier for the first-time user to get up and running.
Initially there was no picture mode per source-type option when I first put out JBS 4 beta and people were up in arms because quite a large number of people have the use case where they want Facebook pictures as a montage and Flickr as full screen (for example). So I do listen and I definitely don't get it right first time!
Personally I'm not a fan of the "if you don't like the new version then go and use the old version" mantra if I can avoid it - that's how you alienate people and I'd rather produce the best software I can that the highest number of people can get use out of. Quite often by taking a step back and thinking about it I can come up with something that gives everybody what they want, but as I say to get to that point takes quite a lot of thinking, prototyping and hallway usability testing.
And please don't feel I'm trying to shoot you down - I'm just trying to find edge cases and use the same thought process I go through with every feature.
Ah yes, you are indeed on the list already - sorry about that!
-
okay, i think i got your point, mostly. not much point discussing it further at this point. guess i'll just wait for the beta-testing to start and join the fun then.
also, though i said this once, i'll say it again:
Your software is very helpful to me, Thanks and keep up the good work!
(hard-working developers deserve praise from time to time) -
I'll contact you off-line when I start working on collections and you can see what you think. Although I'm thinking I'll put out an interim 4.2 release with some bug fixes and a few additional translations before doing a more major update after that (which I'll probably just call 4.3).
-
It's been a while... (got VERY distracted with work...) but in my mockup I forgot to change the names of the folders... So I meant that C:\Wallpapers 1 would be Mode X, C:\Wallpapers 2 would be Mode Y, and C:\Wallpapers 3 would be Mode Z. ?Not that I could have the same folder three different ways.
That said, I like yonizaf's first mock up. I want these three sources to be Mode X, I want these two sources to be Mode Y, I want these last three sources to be Mode Z. Random, I assume, would first pick the mode, then pick a source from that mode. Unless you could make the montage types pick from multiple sources at once so my Postcard Pile (of family and friends) could draw from Facebook, C:\Wallpaper\Family, and my Picasa albums.
-
Do you mind if I add you to my beta testers mailing list? That way you can have a shot of JBS while I'm working on that type of functionality and you can see what you think. Although it may be a while before I actually get to work on it!
-
I'd love to help in any way I can. As you can tell I'm not here everyday... :)
-
Ok, added! The next version, which is a couple of weeks away, contains bug fixes, a couple of features and more languages. Once that's done I'll start work on the next, big version.
Reply To This Topic
You must log in to post.