Thread Locked This thread is locked - replies are not allowed.


This question is answered.


Permlink Replies: 23 - Pages: 2 [ Previous | 1 2 ] - Last Post: 20 Aug 24, 04:21 Last Post By: PECB
JeffTucker

Posts: 8,033
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 22 Jul 24, 13:13   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
 
I'll do some more testing (dealing with multiple versions is a pain in Windows, because when you uninstall any one of the prior versions, that kills the file associations, and you have to reinstall the current version).

But in the meantime, here's a question for you. If Do not re-encode simply means that the album should copy the video from the image directory to the output directory without processing it, why didn't you just let Use original apply to videos as well as images? The answer is that it's because that's not what it originally did. ;)
JeffTucker

Posts: 8,033
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 22 Jul 24, 13:32   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
 
davidekholm wrote:
Let's take it one step at the time. I can't confirm any change between v33.1 and v35 as reported here. IS there a change?

Yes. They behave differently.

Here's a project: https://jefftucker.jalbum.net/vidDimsBug.zip

Unzip it, and make a couple of copies, like vdb33 and vdb35, so you don't get wrapped around the axle.

Open vdb35 in jAlbum 35.0.2, and before you do anything else, take a look at what's there. The video is marked Do not re-encode. The original 20MB video is sitting in the image directory. The processed 6MB video is sitting in the output. Make album, and now look at the output video size - it's 20MB.

Now open vdb33 in jAlbum 33.3.1, and do the same thing. The 6MB output video remains untouched. That's the way it always used to work.

ETA: jAlbum 34.3 behaves the same way as jAlbum 33.3.1. The change didn't show up until jAlbum 35.
JeffTucker

Posts: 8,033
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 22 Jul 24, 13:45   in response to: JeffTucker in response to: JeffTucker
 
Oh, and here's the discussion that led me to create that test album in the first place:

https://jalbum.net/forum/thread.jspa?threadID=57060

In short, jAlbum was leaving the processed video alone, but reporting the height and width dimensions of the original. This caused layout problems. You were reluctant to fix it, because it meant that the album-building process would actually need to retrieve some information from the output (i.e., the dimensions of the processed video), which is an offense against dog and man.

But none of it would be necessary if videos were handled exactly the way images are. More on that later....
davidekholm

Posts: 3,822
Registered: 18-Oct-2002
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 29 Jul 24, 11:18   in response to: JeffTucker in response to: JeffTucker
 
Just commenting that my absence in commenting here is due to vacation.
JeffTucker

Posts: 8,033
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 30 Jul 24, 15:34   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
 
davidekholm wrote:
Just commenting that my absence in commenting here is due to vacation.

I don't recall approving your leave application. Upon your return, please report to the HR Department.
MarkusD

Posts: 777
Registered: 13-Apr-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 31 Jul 24, 08:53   in response to: JeffTucker in response to: JeffTucker
 
JeffTucker wrote:
davidekholm wrote:
Just commenting that my absence in commenting here is due to vacation.

I don't recall approving your leave application. Upon your return, please report to the HR Department.

It is always fun to follow your discussions. :-) I like that kind of humour.
davidekholm

Posts: 3,822
Registered: 18-Oct-2002
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 31 Jul 24, 19:27   in response to: MarkusD in response to: MarkusD
 
Now I know why this happens. On June 6 I adjusted the behaviour of jAlbum's file copy mechanism so it not only considers dates when avoiding to copy files but also considers file sizes. As the source and destination file size differs, it forces a copy.

Now, this behaviour is good for ensuring that resource files gets updated when a user switches a skin or style, but not good for your use case so I've ensured that the classical behaviour of only considering file dates applies when copying video files.

To enjoy the fix, select Tools->External tools->jAlbum core update and restart jAlbum when prompted. The splash screen should read 35.0.3 now.
JeffTucker

Posts: 8,033
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 31 Jul 24, 19:46   in response to: davidekholm in response to: davidekholm
Correct
Yes, the former behavior has been restored.

Along with it, of course, the "video dimensions" bug that I reported years ago is also back. The Code Gods giveth, and the Code Gods taketh away.
PECB

Posts: 11
Registered: 27-Dec-2019
Re: Video Album Ballooned in Size
Posted: 20 Aug 24, 04:21   in response to: JeffTucker in response to: JeffTucker
 
JeffTucker wrote:
Yes, the former behavior has been restored.

Along with it, of course, the "video dimensions" bug that I reported years ago is also back. The Code Gods giveth, and the Code Gods taketh away.


Hi David and Jeff. I'm glad that you were able to fix the bug in my absence. This summer has been brutal with concerts and other family activities. I will give the new iteration of Version 35 when I get the chance. I hope at some point the "video dimensions" bug is fixed. I am marking the main discussion as answered

Edited by: PECB on 20 Aug 2024, 04:21
Legend
Forum admins
Helpful Answer
Correct Answer

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in all forums