This can absolutely not be ruled out. As Jeff sometimes says somewhat mockingly, I'm the only one in the whole universe who uses such long comments in the albums. But in a recent post I found out that there is another user with long comments. Couldn't remember who it was.

Yes, it does. I think that's the core checking to see if any folder thumbnails need to be regenerated, and if you've got hundreds of folders, that could be a little slow. I'm not sure if there's any way to speed up that process.

Your are right. I enabled that option, compile and upload again. Will post if the upload is finished.

And four minutes to compile Tiger's util.js and init.js

Marcus, it doesn't seem that you have checked "Include lifeboat file" under Preferences->Album, so I can't inspect your project settings. Please tick "include lifeboat file", then make and upload the gallery again.

I have a hunch on what could cause this extremely long initial delay though, and that is if you've set image ordering to "Camera ordering" everywhere. This will cause jAlbum to open each source image first. You can avoid this problem by cacheing the camera dates, and this can be done by switching to "Custom ordering" everywhere. jAlbum has an external tool called "Cache image ordering" that does just this. The only downside with this option is that you need to refresh the image ordering for folders where you add new images.

If this doesn't help, then open jAlbum's system console before your start an album build, then, as jAlbum has this very long initial delay, click the "Dump threads" button 2-3 times, ideally with 10 seconds delay, then pass me the generated files for inspection. They will tell me what jAlbum is up to.

I just finished another upload of my album. Lifeboat file:
https://www.markus-drueck.de/norge/lifeboat.zip

OK, I read about that some weeks (or month) ago but I was not sure if this would effect the compile times of my album.

I honestly am a bit afraid of using the tool "Cache image ordering" and end up in a big chaos of the sort order of my album. Yes, of course, I do have several backups of my whole system but restoring them is not I want to do.

I'll see if I can test this on my notebook. I do have a 1:1 copy (except the videos) from my PC on the notebook. So simulating what happens when I use the tool "Cache image ordering" is possible without changing my original system. I'll try that at the weekend and let you know.

Thanks so far.

It looks fine with exiftool, but why not make the image as a plain webp instead of a lossless one?

Jeff, I use that file in the res folder only. It is not part of the album, as a regular picture. But it seems now to me that jAlbum nevertheless does "something" with that file and complains about it.

OK, I'll replace my "hurtigruten_logo_small.webp" with your png file. Thanks.

The bad thing about the triangle in the lower status line is, I never look at it, it is kind of invisible to my eyes. In our own applications, if there is an error, the user will get a message box, which he has to confirmed. So it is impossible to miss a critical situation. Yes, I know, that is not very nice but how should I cure a problem I never noticed. This is just my thought about the triangle in the status line.