From Admin on Jul 18, 2007 15:22:00

The image arguement makes no sense to me. The only difference between an IGN thumbnail and a CMS thumbnail is that it has less detail.
When I physically BLUR the image in photoshop, it looks similar to the IGN image in quality.

Dude is not blur!!!! It reduces that it looks like the origina,l your resize raw, and that why it looks like that, with squares and bad resolution

Your the only one the think that bad resolution and squares on th thumbs, means more details CMON!!! Get some programmer friend of yours if you find us crazy, and talk with him about thumbs, he will tell you the same thing. I mean 20 PHP developers at work with 10 experienced, and they laughed when they saw this ...

From arya on Jul 18, 2007 16:06:37
Check these links
Gallery 2
CCMS
You can notice the text looks wierd in the thumb on my site. it looks much smoother on gallery 2 page. it shouldnt be very difficult to tweak it in my opinion.
Another thing i would like to point out is that each time we need a thumb, its created on fly. considering a page with collection of thumbnails, which will slow down and may put heavy load on server on a high traffic website. IMHO I would rather wait and see this issue sorted out than rushing thru the release.
P.S. : Side by Side
CCMS                      Gallery2

Because that thumbs doesnt have much details an ojects and in it, only the text is obvious but on large thumbs, it ovious, best example on Eriks one...

One is blurry and is 1 kb, the other is sharp and is 7 kb. The CCMS thumb is of better quality, simply.

looks like you’re right. However i would still like to have thumbs generated permanently rather than on-fly. You’d notice the speed difference if you’re one a slower connection, everything on forums pages loads quick. my avatar takes longest to load.

Could we have an option to replace current thumbnailer php with our own?

Knock yourself out if you want to implement your own thumb system.