Is it possible to show the whole image in the thumbnails rather than having either length or width cropped? Can you direct me to the where the script is that determines relative size of thumbnail image and container etc?
Having unchecked "Crop Thumbs to fixed shape" thumbnails display the whole image, which I like, but portrait format thumbs now appear much larger than landscape thumbs, even though I've set image bounds for thumbnails to 124x124
This is a peculiarity of this particular skin. Try almost any other skin, and you won't see this odd effect. In short, the skin is ignoring the image bounds. The thumbnails created by the jAlbum core program are obeying the image bounds, but the skin is showing the portrait image thumbnails larger than they really are.
I'll have to leave it to drmikey to explain why that is.
How about a link? I just made a gallery with your settings and the thumbs are as they should be. Did you "Make all" ? I don't have any code that bypasses the thumb image sizes but if is a bug with a certain setting, I can certainly fix it. The images are loaded by ajax, so that can be an issue in some cases.
Default settings, but with "Crop Thumbs to fixed shape" turned off. Thumbnail image bounds are 150x150, but that Brunel thumbnail is being displayed at 150x222. The actual thumbnail in the output directory is 103x150.
Definitely an improvement. With the default settings (white thumbnail background), it creates the illusion that the thumbnail isn't centered in its box (ss000646). But that is, in fact, just an illusion - with a different colored background, the truth emerges (ss000647). The best "look" seems to come from the elimination of the shadow on the thumbnail box (ss000648). It might be better with a box-shadow on all four sides.
Ideally, the thumbnail box should be sized to fit the thumbnail image, without any excess padding around the image, but I can sort of "feel" why that might be very difficult to do, given the underlying script. You'd probably have to create boxes within boxes, where the outer box would be invisible, but always a fixed width (to satisfy the needs of the script), and only the inner box would be visible, and would conform to the thumbnail image dimensions. Messy, to say the least.