Basically the title.

Do pictures really need a limit to how far you can zoom?

It annoys me to no end when there’s a larger image that I’d really like to zoom in to view a detail and I run into an arbitrary wall just too far away.

  • idunnololz@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    This doesn’t read like a feature request since it’s so vague so I am not adding this to the roadmap. Feel free to respond to this comment or create a new post if you have a more concrete feature request.

    • rants_unnecessarily@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Oh? I thought it was pretty clear and precise. The arbitrary zoom limit should be removed.
      I’d love to know what further details you would like.

      To reiterate after further testing:
      When zooming in on a picture, it stops once one of the sides of the picture “fills” the screen. Ie, if the image is wider than my screen I can zoom in untill the top and bottom are aligned with my screen, but no further.
      This prevents zooming in very far. And on a large (high resolution) image that prevents from zooming in on the details.

      Edit:
      Turns out that the zoom just happened to be the same on a couple of pictures (they had the same aspect ratio) so it looked like it stopped when the top and bottom hit the screen edge. But it was just a coincidence.

      The point still stands. An arbitrary zoom limit prevents from zooming close enough on large images. It is unnecessary and a nuisance.

      • idunnololz@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        I think this feature request can be summarized as: add a setting to allow users to adjust the max zoom in the image viewer.

        To answer your question about why there even is a max zoom. I use the app a lot with one hand. When I do this I double tap to zoom once, double tap again to zoom twice, then double tap to return to 1x zoom and then I can swipe the image away to go back. This series of gestures is what feels most natural to me. Without a max zoom, I’d have to do an edge swipe or a double tap + hold + drag. Not impossible just slightly less natural.

            • rants_unnecessarily@piefed.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Sure. I only used the word to distinguish the difference. Maybe “analogue zoom” would’ve been better.

              Analogue zooming shouldn’t need to be connected with double tap zoom’s amounts.

              • idunnololz@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                22 hours ago

                They do because you can pinch to zoom then double tap to zoom or vice versa. To disable one if the other is done first woild result in a confusing experience.

                • rants_unnecessarily@piefed.socialOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  21 hours ago

                  I don’t mean the other should be disabled. Just that the amount zoomed with the tap should not have anything to do with the amount you’ve zoomed, or how much you can zoom, with pinching.
                  If you have pinched, of course you can tap to the next zoom or back to original if you are maxed. Or if you’ve tapped, sure you can continue by pinching.

                  I don’t understand why the amounts are connected.

                  All I want is that the maximum amount zoomed by pinching is removed.

  • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Do pictures really need a limit to how far you can zoom?

    Well, once a single pixel fills the entire screen, I see no benefit to zooming in further, so that’s where I would set the limit.

    Summit’s limit is significantly below that, though, which can be inconvenient.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Get better software

    Edit: oh I thought this was asklemmy or something. Open an issue if there isn’t one for this feature request.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Every picture has a baseline resolution. Think of it like an old-fashioned tv screen. If you go up to the screen and look really close…all you’re going to see are little colored dots. You stand back and all those little colored dots produce an image…but up close they’re just dots.

    Same thing with all digital images. You keep zooming in, and eventually you’re just going to be looking at pixels. The higher the resolution the more pixels per square inch…but eventually, you get down to the point where there’s nothing smaller to see.