JPG low resolution

Help
2009-12-24
2013-05-30
  • Davide Ramo
    Davide Ramo
    2009-12-24

    Hi,

    I've imported some directories with photos .JPG, but when I try to display the photos they appear in a poor quality (low resolution).
    The upnp player (WD TV Live) shows the .JPG resolution (about 6Mpx) but it displays badly.
    The same photos are shared with samba share and accessed from samba they are shown fine.

    Is there in some config point the quality of .jpg or something like that? I was unable to find configurations for .jpg.

    Thanks a lot.

    Davide

     
  • Jin
    Jin
    2009-12-24

    Hmm, I can only assume that your device does correctly figure out the difference between the actual image and the jpeg thumbnail, and is displaying the thumbnail instead of the image. Btw that'd be a bug in the device firmware.

    If your device has a DLNA logo you can also try to enable the protocolInfo option in config.xml, we will then send more information which may help.

    Kind regards,

    Jin

     
  • neutro
    neutro
    2009-12-27

    I got a WDTV Live too and have the same problem. The WDTV Live seems to display the thumbnail when pictures are accessed through Media Tomb; however, the same pictures, when accessed through SMB network shares display properly. So there's something with Media Tomb here I guess.

     
  • Jin
    Jin
    2009-12-27

    I think you missed the point of my post, that's more or less what I was saying:

    the device can not cope with multiple resources which we offer via UPnP and fails to figure out the difference between the thumbnail and the actual image - I think this is worth a bug report to the manufacturer.

    Unfortunately there is no easy way to disable thumbnails, I guess we should add that. Currently you can only get rid of thumbnail support by recompiling with disabled libexif…

     
  • ina
    ina
    2009-12-28

    For me removing the following line in the config.xml helped:

    <treat mimetype="image/jpeg" as="jpg"/>

    You do not have thumbnail nor are the images classified by date but at least you have full resolution.

    Does this work for you as well?

    What does this line in the config file do that breaks the WDTV Live?

     
  • ina
    ina
    2009-12-28

    The line to remove in config.xml is

        <treat mimetype="image/jpeg" as="jpg"/>

     
  • Jin
    Jin
    2009-12-28

    Actually, good idea :) I should have thought about that myself…

    The "treat as" setting tells MediaTomb, that the file with the given mime type is a JPG image, and that it should be piped through libexif upon import. And - libexif is the library that checks if an EXIF thumbnail is present or not.

    When you disable that, the file is "just" added to the database and no metadata extraction takes place. Of course you lose all EXIF information, including the thumbnail - which in your particular case is exactly what you want.

     
  • Gregor2809
    Gregor2809
    2009-12-29

    Hi! Same here.
    This is what i posted in the wd-forum (community.wdc.com) today:

    I'm having the following problem:

    Using Ubuntu 9.10/mediatomb for streaming photos/videos/music, everything works fine EXCEPT the photo-viewing feature:
    Although the photos' size and dimensions are correctly displayed in the info-bar, the picture itself is too small (centered on screen) and of a poor quality.

    After searching the web I found out that the WD-box obviously can't cope with the preview-thumbnails that are presented by mediatomb.
    A strange mix occurs: the photos' data is displayed correctly while the picture itself seems to be the provided thumbnail.

    Using upnp-inspector for viewing what data is provided by mediatomb I saw that additionally to the photo itself a thumbnail is provided, too. I examined my mediatomb-database to find out that there are "two" entries in the "resources"-field for each picture, separated by the standard-field-separator (an example):

    0~protocolInfo=http-get%3A%2A%3Aimage%2Fjpeg%3A%2A&size=864167&resolution=1280x852~~
    1~protocolInfo=http-get%3A%2A%3Aimage%2Fjpeg%3A%2A&resolution=160x107~rct=EX_TH~

    I guess the first entry is the picture itself and the second one the thumbnail.

    Perhaps there is someone out there with a good idea?

    Gregor

     
  • Gregor2809
    Gregor2809
    2009-12-29

    (please ignore me…)

    ;-)

     
  • Jin
    Jin
    2009-12-29

    Well, would have been nicer if you used Cidero, then you would get an XML like this:

        <item id="1820" parentID="101" restricted="1">
          <dc:title>DSCF7915.JPG</dc:title>
          <upnp:class>object.item.imageItem</upnp:class>
          <dc:date>2009-10-29</dc:date>
          <res protocolInfo="http-get:*:image/jpeg:*" size="1540474" resolution="2848x2136">http://10.102.15.106:50500/content/media/object_id/1820/res_id/0/ext/file.jpg</res>
          <res protocolInfo="http-get:*:image/jpeg:*" resolution="160x120">http://10.102.15.106:50500/content/media/object_id/1820/res_id/1/rct/EX_TH/ext/file.jpg</res>
        </item>

    …which is exactly what your WD player is receiving.

    Using several res (resource) entries with a resolution attribute is the default way of serving thumbnails over UPnP. It is common practice to point the very first resource to the original image.

    I think you should add the XML fragment to your post in the WD forum since it is better readable than what you got from the inspector.

     
  • Gregor2809
    Gregor2809
    2009-12-29

    Great idea!

    Thanks a lot - I didn't know Cidero until today.

    I will add the XML fragment asap.

     
  • Gregor, I saw your post over at the WD Live community too. Did you ever solve this? One interesting piece of data: I have my photos all resized to 2000 pixels on the long edge. For me, landscape photos show up as you describe and portrait photos show up at the correct resolution. So I wonder if the WD Live is choosing to not to display photos over a certain resolution?