Prev: Nikon D700x expected announcement date Dec 20
Next: Need comments on CIS Ink systems for Epson Artisan 700.
From: Terry Pinnell on 15 Dec 2008 17:29
Roger Hunt <nospam(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <2j4ck41q1lfeaketearjbvmc6gcq0cls8e(a)4ax.com>, Terry Pinnell
><terrypinDELETE(a)THESEdial.pipex.com> writes
>>Ron Hunter <rphunter(a)charter.net> wrote:
>
>>>It should be noted that it is possible to specify the size of the
>>>thumbnail images in Windows Explorer.
>>
>>Thanks, I didn't know that. Or, if I did, I'd forgotten.
>>
>>For others who prefer less cryptic help, here's the result of the
>>subsequent brief research I've just done.
>>
>>The following XP registry key appears to determine size and quality:
>>
>>[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer]
>>"ThumbnailSize"=dword:00000100
>>
>>I've changed mine now to 200 pixels, so that key now looks like this:
>>
>>ThumbnailSize REG_DWORD 0x000000c8 (200)
>>
>>---------
>>
>>But, as me(a)mine.net pointed out up-thread, TweakUI is a fast way to
>>change this setting. I'm embarrassed to say that in all the years I've
>>used this excellent utility I'd never used the thumbnail section.
>>
>>I reckon that larger size will satisfy most of my needs now. I'm using
>>the My Computer folders all the time as a base for projects, so
>>viewing and selecting from there comes naturally, now that I can see
>>the thumbnails so much better at 200 px than the 96 px they were
>>before. What impact it has on performance, such as folder-opening
>>time, remains to be seen.
>>
>I don't think this has been mentioned ...
>In Windows Explorer > Tools > Folder Options > View, is the opportunity
>to cache thumbnails in order to speed up folder opening times.
>As far as I can see, the default setting is to cache them, but I suppose
>it is possible that the setting may be set to not cache them (slower).
>Might be worth checking?

Thanks, just did so and it's still unchecked here, i.e set to cache,
to give max performance. I can't think why I would ever want to
disable that?

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK
From: Roger Hunt on 15 Dec 2008 18:11
In article <9fmdk49u54radhdcaifp64dhjos8chj3pe(a)4ax.com>, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE(a)THESEdial.pipex.com> writes
>Roger Hunt <nospam(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>I don't think this has been mentioned ...
>>In Windows Explorer > Tools > Folder Options > View, is the opportunity
>>to cache thumbnails in order to speed up folder opening times.
>>As far as I can see, the default setting is to cache them, but I suppose
>>it is possible that the setting may be set to not cache them (slower).
>>Might be worth checking?
>
>Thanks, just did so and it's still unchecked here, i.e set to cache,
>to give max performance. I can't think why I would ever want to
>disable that?
>
I don't ever use thumbnails in Windows Explorer so have it disabled, and
it doesn't ever need to compile those thumbs.db files.
--
Roger Hunt
From: hummingbird on 15 Dec 2008 18:55

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:11:44 +0000 'Roger Hunt'
wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

>In article <9fmdk49u54radhdcaifp64dhjos8chj3pe(a)4ax.com>, Terry Pinnell
><terrypinDELETE(a)THESEdial.pipex.com> writes
>>Roger Hunt <nospam(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>I don't think this has been mentioned ...
>>>In Windows Explorer > Tools > Folder Options > View, is the opportunity
>>>to cache thumbnails in order to speed up folder opening times.
>>>As far as I can see, the default setting is to cache them, but I suppose
>>>it is possible that the setting may be set to not cache them (slower).
>>>Might be worth checking?
>>
>>Thanks, just did so and it's still unchecked here, i.e set to cache,
>>to give max performance. I can't think why I would ever want to
>>disable that?
>>
>I don't ever use thumbnails in Windows Explorer so have it disabled, and
>it doesn't ever need to compile those thumbs.db files.

I also have it ticked (no thumbnails) but never seen any delay
in icons being generated on the rare occasions I use explorer
even in a large folder.


--
"All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
From: John Weston on 16 Dec 2008 08:02
In article <vqcdk4971fdul75lk20lfp6nq2pooct34v(a)4ax.com>,
terrypinDELETE(a)THESEdial.pipex.com says...

> That was the first thing I tried, but it doesn't work here. A new
> thumbnail close to the location clicked is always selected!
>
> After further tests, I think it's because I'm using 200 x 200
> thumbnails. In effect, there's no 'empty' space left. Switching to 100
> x 100 it works OK. At 150 x 150 I can manage to de-select after
> several careful attempts.
>

Mmm - I also have 200x200 set at the minute, to simulate what you have
and, because I also display the filename, I can click to the side of the
name which is an unused space, thereby de-selecting the images

If you select "Paint thumbnail borders", it makes it easier to see the
unused space. Also gives a slight 3-D appearance, making the image look
like it's in a slide holder.
--
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice
From: Terry Pinnell on 16 Dec 2008 09:39
John Weston <invalid(a)earlsway.invalid> wrote:

>In article <vqcdk4971fdul75lk20lfp6nq2pooct34v(a)4ax.com>,
>terrypinDELETE(a)THESEdial.pipex.com says...
>
>> That was the first thing I tried, but it doesn't work here. A new
>> thumbnail close to the location clicked is always selected!
>>
>> After further tests, I think it's because I'm using 200 x 200
>> thumbnails. In effect, there's no 'empty' space left. Switching to 100
>> x 100 it works OK. At 150 x 150 I can manage to de-select after
>> several careful attempts.
>>
>
>Mmm - I also have 200x200 set at the minute, to simulate what you have
>and, because I also display the filename, I can click to the side of the
>name which is an unused space, thereby de-selecting the images
>
>If you select "Paint thumbnail borders", it makes it easier to see the
>unused space. Also gives a slight 3-D appearance, making the image look
>like it's in a slide holder.

Got it, thanks John. The clickable rectangle of unused space is in
fact quite large. I was apparently clicking everywhere but there!

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Nikon D700x expected announcement date Dec 20
Next: Need comments on CIS Ink systems for Epson Artisan 700.