I'm testing the new tiger skin. I have chosen to have a header image that spreads over the complete page width.
There is one issue with the header image: The header image looks like it has a low resolution, it is not sharp.
To demonstrate the effect, i attached two screenshots:
The first one shows on the left side the image as it is in jAlbum, the image at the right shows the original jpg with almost the same scaling-factor in XnView. The one im XnView shows more details. The one after processing in jAlbum is not sharp (however, the images inside the slideshows are sharp and detailed).
The second img show the picture in it's original size. This contains also more details.
Is there a way to get a better image quality for the header-image?
The image size in Tiger is set for the slideshows at 960x720. So this should be the maximum size for images in the slideshow, but, dependent on screen size, the header image can be (and should be) bigger.
For the header (hero) background the skin creates a bigger image (cropped for this area), which supposed to be 1600px wide. If the original image is smaller, than the background might be blurred. How big the original was? Also, if you made the album first with not full width header, the image might remained from the previous build, even if you've disabled the processing of subfolders. Check the size of folderimage.jpg files in the output directory (Ctrl-Shift-O).
Thank you, this helped to solve the problem.
I have set the maximum page width to 1080, so the header was cropped at 1200. With a page width to 1400 the header is now set to 1600 and the image quality is perfect.
For the header background the skin creates a picture max 1600px wide, if I'm right. But a lot of screens are at least HD (1920 wide). That means my header image (when shown on the whole screen) isn't sharp on that screens, I don't like that. Is there a way to make wider header images?
If jAlbum let the user choose a theme image (let's choose one name for these creatures and stick to it, can we?), one that's not necessarily used for folder thumbnails, and not necessarily included in the slideshow (user option in both cases), and let the user set image bounds for it (three sets of bounds - thumbs, images, themes), then this wouldn't be a problem.
I believe most users on 1980 wide screens don't maximize their browsers - neither do I. And even if I do that I don't really see any quality problems. It's a background image anyway and has only some 20% magnification.
Well, probably I'm not a default user, but most of the time I browse full screen on my 1920x1200 monitor. And for me it's the difference of seeing a crispy sharp picture or a somewhat blurry picture. I like the sharp one. See the difference on the screen shot.