Large images on image description pages are being sent original-size
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

Author: dbenbenn

Description:
The image description page for [[Image:Map of Colorado highlighting Huerfano
County.png]], for example, shows the original 6711x4876 image, instead of a
thumbnail. This gobbles bandwidth, and makes image description pages completely
unusable for those of use with limited computer memory.


Version: 1.6.x
Severity: minor
URL: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Map_of_Colorado_highlighting_Huerfano_County.png

Details

Reference
bz3771
bzimport set Reference to bz3771.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
bzimport created this task.Oct 21 2005, 4:49 PM

[Wikitech-l] Images greater than 12.5 megapixels can't be thumbnailed
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2005-October/032030.html

dbenbenn wrote:

Ah, thanks! I think that image description pages should still use the old
thumbnail link, even if the thumbnail won't get generated. If the thumbnail
already exists, then the page will display fine. And even if it doesn't, the
user can always click on the "download high resolution" link, but won't be
forced to download the huge image.

Note that this is what categories do, for example
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Colorado_county_locator_maps

rowan.collins wrote:

Perhaps a special text link as a placeholder could be used, as in "This is a
very large image which can't be thumbnailed. Click here to view the full-size
version".

But is the 12.5 megapixel thing really the problem here? By the looks of it,
these are SVGs, and should be thumbnailable really easily - the "S" stands for
"Scalable", after all. Oh, wait, you replaced them since reporting this bug. Any
chance of finding another example so we can see the behaviour in action?

dbenbenn wrote:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Colorado_national_forest_maps is
another example, which should stick around for at least a week or so (though
eventually I'll be converting those to SVG, too).

Text as placeholder sounds like a good idea.

dbenbenn wrote:

Another problem with the current behavior is that, when a thumbnail of a large
image is used in an article, it appears as a red link. So people come along and
remove the "deleted" image. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arapaho_National_Forest&diff=26069808&oldid=25698758
for example. A blue link to the image description page would be much more useful.

avarab wrote:

Not a critical issue, bumping to minor

wclark wrote:

The original problem (large PNGs causing ImageMagick to eat up too much RAM) can
be fixed with a few command-line options:

http://studio.imagemagick.org/pipermail/magick-developers/2002-December/001206.html

I'll try to test this when I get a chance, to see if it really works as
advertised. It would be nice if the size restriction could simply be lifted,
since this is the easiest solution to the related problems.

davidcraig5 wrote:

Still broken. Did you try out the parameters Bill Clark?

AFAIK this doesn't happen any more; if the picture is too big, the thumbnail is replaced by an error message:
"Error creating thumbnail: Invalid thumbnail parameters or image file with more than 12.5 million pixels"

And there's an open bug about this specific issue ( bug 9497 ).

Gilles moved this task from Untriaged to Done on the Multimedia board.Dec 4 2014, 10:49 AM

Add Comment