Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
26 Aug 25, 23:03
in response to: davidekholm
|
|
|
|
|
|
A bit of a mixed bag. I get a thumbnail in the Explore view, and I can make an album using the original. So, the slide image is AVIF, but the thumbnail is JPG. So far, so good.
However, the embedded web server doesn't know how to cough up an AVIF, so it offers to download it.
The lightbox script I use in many of my skins has trouble detecting the size of the image. That's not a jAlbum problem. But the Floatbox developer is well and truly retired from messing with this stuff, so.... On the other hand, my old-school "slide page" skins, like Mercury, handle the result without complaint.
I've also run into some sample AVIF images online that produce a complete mess in the Explore view. But I have no idea who's responsible for that. The sample images could be malformed, though they all display properly in a browser.
Here's a ZIP file of some sample images to play with.
|
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
26 Aug 25, 23:09
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
I believe I've figured out where the Floatbox script does its image detection, so I'm pretty sure I can modify it. Right now, it's looking for JPG, PNG, GIF, or WEBP - adding AVIF to that "or" string should do the trick. But it'll take a few single malts for me to wade into it, properly fortified. 
ETA: Yup, that cracked the problem. Not even one full belt of Lagavulin!  |
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
26 Aug 25, 23:11
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
However, the embedded web server doesn't know how to cough up an AVIF, so it offers to download it.
I take this back - this is another instance of the Floatbox script having a problem. With something like Mercury or Tiger, it's OK.
ETA: Confirmed. With Floatbox modified, the embedded web server behaves itself just fine. No problem with jalbum.net hosting, either (or with my own web host).
So, what does that leave us with? AVIF images can be used in jAlbum, and will be untouched if you include only the original, and not the scaled image. No sense letting jAlbum scale them and turn them into JPG's - that's a step backwards.
What we don't have is the ability for jAlbum to produce AVIF images. And from what I've seen in other image-processing apps, that might be a tall order. There are lots of really lousy conversions going on out there.  |
|
|
Posts:
3,915
Registered:
18-Oct-2002
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 18:11
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
|
Will do. If jAlbum's embedded browser doesn't support AVIF, then we perhaps got a reason to update it. It's sadly a commercial component.
|
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 18:14
in response to: davidekholm
|
|
|
|
|
If jAlbum's embedded browser doesn't support AVIF, then we perhaps got a reason to update it.
The embedded web server actually handles AVIF's correctly. I was getting a confused result because my lightbox script was doing something screwy. And I've had no problems with the integrated browser and AVIF's.
ETA: Attached, a happy AVIF parrot with the embedded server, integrated browser, and my updated Neptune. |
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 18:24
in response to: davidekholm
|
|
|
There are, however, serious problems with the jdeli conversion of AVIF to JPG. Take a look at the thumbnails in this album, which are JPG's. Compare colors to the slide images, which are the original AVIF files. It's especially awful with the parrot.
https://jefftucker.jalbum.net/avif/
ETA: In fact, I have not found any AVIF file for which the conversion to JPG is working. Check out any of the images in the ZIP file I attached, above. Just from the thumbnails in the Explore view, you can tell you're headed for trouble. |
|
|
Posts:
3,948
Registered:
4-Aug-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 21:04
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
Tried your test zipped files and the yuv type files don't render thumbnails in jAlbum (37.7.4) after core update and new file.
The output Parrot file does not suffer from the colour shift you saw.
Edited by: RobM on 27 Aug 2025, 20:05 |
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 21:15
in response to: RobM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's what I get, attached.
Despite doing a core update, I'm still seeing 37.7.4 on the splash screen. Maybe the problem?
ETA: And I get the same awful result on my M2 Macbook Air.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,948
Registered:
4-Aug-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
27 Aug 25, 22:09
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
Here's what I get, attached.
Despite doing a core update, I'm still seeing 37.7.4 on the splash screen. Maybe the problem?
ETA: And I get the same awful result on my M2 Macbook Air.
All very strange. more data, I'd guess you have the same OS - 15.6.1
MacBook Air 15.3 inch, Colour profile LCD. |
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
28 Aug 25, 15:27
in response to: RobM
|
|
|
|
One more thing to check - what's the exact byte count of your copy of the jdeli file? Mine is 4,591,109. It occurs to me that a file called "daily trial" might be an alpha version, and maybe not the same every time you download it!
|
|
|
Posts:
3,948
Registered:
4-Aug-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
28 Aug 25, 21:32
in response to: JeffTucker
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, been out and this is the fastest I could respond. 4,951,109. Created date Wednesday, 27 August 2025 at 19:48
Did you spoonerise the 95 to 59?
Attached is my file. |
|
|
Posts:
8,197
Registered:
31-Jan-2006
|
|
|
|
Re: Possible fix to WebP out of memory condition
Posted:
28 Aug 25, 21:43
in response to: RobM
|
|
|
Did you spoonerise the 95 to 59?
Yes, I did. Same file. Too bad - that was my best theory about why I'd be seeing failures on two wildly different machines.
ETA: At least I am now seeing 37.7.5 for the jAlbum version number. That's progress, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Legend
|
|
Forum admins
|
|
Helpful Answer
|
|
Correct Answer
|
|
