Test Topic for Admin

[lata]

Ken
I have uploaded two image using Attachments

1680 x 1050 is my monitor size

1800 x 1200

2400 x 1600

[Ken Berry]

OK. Just to give you an idea of what I see. Here is the first image which shows the same whether I single or double click it. As will be obvious, I did it full screen. The second image also showed the same size regardless of whether I single or double clicked.

The third image was a bit different, in that it gave one response if I single clicked and a slightly more zoomed response if I double clicked. Here it is single clicked:

And here it is double clicked:

[RobertOZ]

Using the same 4K monitor settings as Ken (150%) I get different results

[Ken Berry]

That's possibly because you do not zoom the browser either at all or as much as me. My 150% Windows zoom affects all programs etc on the computer. But while I can (just) read the browser zoomed only with that 150%, I find it much easier to just do a mouse wheel+Ctrl zoom which only affects the browser and the images, web pages etc shown in the browser. That why I say I can zoom out to view the whole of these images after one click or two...

[RobertOZ]

I have my browser (Firefox) set at 133%

[asik1]

So now the 900pix limit is over?
I keep shrinking my attachments.

[lata]

So now the 900pix limit is over?
I keep shrinking my attachments.

The title of the post refers to "Test" and as such no decision has been made, don’t hold your breath
Adi, how large are your attachments?

[lata]

Portrait Images, what do these look like on your 4K monitors
Using the Attachment sizes of 1800 x 1200 would cause a portrait image to have a max height of 1200

Using the Attachment sizes of 2400 x 1600 would cause a portrait image to have a max height of 1600

[asik1]

I'm with 2X19" so my full desktop is 2560X1080 , but mostly I will attach only one screen 1280X1080

[Ken Berry]

The first one only responds to one click i.e. a second click doesn't make any difference. The image which appears shows down to about 2"of screen space below the window in the building on the left. The second image, with one click shows much the same, though with only about 1"of screen space below the window. With two clicks the bottom of the monitor screen is about a third of the way into the window.

First Size -- Same for one or two clicks:

Second Size Two Clicks:

[RobertOZ]

Again, get different results to Ken,

The first image, like Ken, only responds to one click, but I do get the full size image, taking up the full height of the screen
For the second image, one click gives the same result as the first, double clicking gives the same result as the first, but if you then click again on the image, it gives a zoomed in result, again full height, not all visible on screen without moving slider, but now wider by 30%

[lata]

I assume if you were to revert your monitors to 100% then the images will display correctly and that the 2400 x 1600 larger image would not be oversized even with double clicks

[RobertOZ]

Well, yes, you are correct, but everything else is too small to be readable

[lata]

Thanks Robert
Makes one wonder if using a 4K for computer work is worth doing

I did a google and it seems that 4K recommended size is 150% whereas 100% is recommended for smaller monitors.
Just seems a little strange that we purchase 4K expecting better quality when we have to tweak the settings

I think I would have to use the bins as in my avatar

anyway 1800 x 1200 for attachments seems the right size for 4K monitors
We are also having other size issues using BMP images
also using the tags does not use the thumbnail / preview size, just shows in full.

as in this post
https://forum.corel.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 15#p378017

[lata]

1800 x 1200