Log in to post in the forums, comment on the blog and submit or rate photos in the photo contests.
New Content Since Last Visit
No New Content Since Last Visit
backup batch Beta Canon canvas categories color management Convert copy crop database date develop display dng Edit editing Embed EXIF import IPTC Keywords mac metadata NEF Originals preview print pro Pro 2.5 Pro 3 process mode RAW rename resize Rotate save search slideshow thumbnails TIFF upgrade video vista windows 7
Sign up to get special e-mail only offers, photography and software tips from ACDSee.
Shabbadang
Member
For those who needs the program window to shrink for smaller images, there is a free solution: Irfan View. It has got all sorts of viewing options. Of course, it's not ACDSee, but it's very quick and versatile as a viewer, and it's free.
Not many people have images smaller than their screen today, since digital cameras left the 2 MP stage about 9 years ago. But of course, for web view smaller images are still common.
gurm42
Member
I think the primary issue here, for me, is that I've never really liked the whole "spend all my time inside one interface" thing. I'm the kind of guy that has 2 monitors, with about 20+ windows/programs open at any given time. The idea of suspending EVERYTHING ELSE I'M DOING in order to browse/sort/edit photos is pretty foreign to me. But that's the way all the editing/viewing programs are headed. Elephants is certainly set up that way - drives me nuts but my wife loves it! So I think this is probably an intentional change... much as it frustrates me, I may have to get used to it.
Marc Sabatella
Moderator
Thanks Brett & John for your comments; I think you've summed up where I'm coming from well.
And thank you Gurm42 for your clear description of how you use the program and why the feature would be important to you in that type of workflow. I think you're right - ACDSee is basically assuming that when you are working on your photos, that's this all you are doing, and ACDSee is the only program you will be using for the most part, and you will want the window maximized. It's not much set up for the sort of constant switching back and forth with other applications you seem to be suggesting. And in that light, you're right - it's a missing feature that was probably removed simply because it doesn't work so well with the new interface, in which the viewer is just a mode of the main window rather than a separate window. I'd still recommend submitting an enhancement request, as I'm sure it's not *impossible* to do. But frankly, while sticking with PM2009 or Pro 2.5 might be an OK workaround for now, I suspect at some point, you might find the new features of newer versions worth upgrading to, so it might make sense to tr to find a way to working more effectively with the maximized window. I know I'm a huge user of alt-tab to switch between windows; I have virtually all my applications maximized (except the occasional Explorer window).
But in any case, what you are describing is still different from what I was asking for clarification on. The initial posts suggested they needed the auto-resize feature in order to see image at "best quality", which simply isn't true. So I'm guessing they were simply misunderstanding something about how ACDSee works, and how it is indeed completely possible to see images at "best quality" without this feature. As John suggests, I'm asking for more clarification so I can suggest how you can get "best quality" without auto-resize, which has nothing to do with image quality.
Marc Sabatella
Moderator
Marc we get that you don't understand it, but your responses, and position with ACDSee (yes position, moderator, not paid, but you have a position with them as they had to give you this moderator status) makes your responses appear as 'official' and that is something you DO need to understand, whether you agree with the perception or not, it exists.
You are absolutely right; I do need to be more clear about this, since I can see how people might get the impression that I am representing ACD. I will try to be more careful about this.
Tinami was expressing a concern over a missing feature that has been there all along apparently, and is important to him. It shouldn't matter that YOU dont understand why it's important to him.
As John suggests, it *does* matter, because it is entirely possible he was simply misunderstanding how the interface works, and that he can indeed get what he wants (viewing images at "best quality") without this feature. In other words, it is entirely possible - quite likely, in fact - that the problem some of these users are experiencing as a result of the absence of this feature can be solved *without* any change to the product at all. And I cannot see how my offering to help people solve these problems using the existing tools can be seen as anything but a good thing. So if in fact the problem is simply one of the user not understanding how to use the tools as they are to see images at "best quality", then I consider myself to be doing a service here.
If on the other hand there really is some respect in which somehow the lack of auto-resize really does prevent someone from seeing an image at "best quality", that would be important information for ACD to know, As a user of ACDSee myself, when I make an enhancement request, I know it is in my best interest to make sure I am explaining the value of enhancement as clearly as I can. If I cannot successful convey that to my fellow users here, that should serve as a bit of wake-up call to me that perhaps I need to explain better if I wish to convince ACD of the value of my suggestion. So I am simply offering that same friendly advice to those requesting this feature. They are, of course, free to ignore my advice.
I think gurm42 does do a great job of explaining a 8different* respect - one completely unrelated to the original complaint about being unable to see images at "best quality" - in which auto-resize can be useful. It makes clear that the value of the enhancement has to do with how ACDSee's window interacts with other open application windows. Knowing the value of the enhancement helps a company prioritize it.
Perplexer
Member
This is the third thread about this issue I have seen on this forum so far. It should be clear by now that they made a mistake removing this from ACDSee Pro 3.0 regardless if some people can't understand why many of us NEED this feature back.
This is why you should always try a program before you buy it. I am currently using ACDSee 6.0 from 2004 and I was thinking of buying ACDSee Pro 3.0. Now that I see they actually took steps back in its developement I decided I will stay with my current version which has this feature still in it.
Perplexer
Member
Oh, let me cross-link to my other thread as well for some additional "bugs" in ACDSee Pro 3.0
http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/missing-window-size-and-some-more#post-45794
Subscribe to this topic via RSS
You must log in to post.
