MineWeather
MineWeather copied to clipboard
sawyerpollard
8k/4k support? 😢
Super nice, love at first sight, any thoughts about adding 8k resolution support?
A nice Idea would be to have like 12-15 picture for each weather (and/or being able to upload our owns) and the extension picks one at random. The pictures used at the moment aren't 4k so having those at a 4k/8k resolution is impossible.
I definitely understand your concern with the resolution of the images. I sourced these images from various websites, and, unfortunately, these were the highest resolution versions that I could find. The hardest part is finding aesthetic photos with high enough resolution. If someone were able to freely share photos for the extension, I would be happy to include them. And, if I have extra time, I can try to load some shaders and take screenshots.
Have you tried asking Reddit for help? I believe there is a good chance that there will be many good screenshots.
I could possibly provide some photos in 4k/8k with my (semi) decent gaming pc and a screenshot mod I found. If that’s okay, I’ll see what I can do :p
After monkeying around for 15 minutes in Forge, I got a 8k screenshot working. I'll open up a pull request sometime soon to integrate this (after correcting the photo and making it so it won't download 100mb files every time...).
In the meantime, here's a sneak peak:
@randy-halim It would be great if you could have a night time and day time version of each photo in the same spot. And maybe you could send the originals, and we could experiment with different optimization strategies. And of course you'll have a photo credit and link in the bottom left of the new tab pages with your images.
I think the main conditions images we'd have for now are: Raining (light, medium, heavy maybe?) Scene, Lightning Scene, Snowing Scene, Polar Biome, Jungle Biome, Desert Biome, Pleasant Grassy Biome (maybe with a village), Swamp Biome, Nether (could be good for super hot weather or wildfires), Tropical Scene (island or beach maybe). And day and night variations for each, but with the same position and angle.
These are the types of images I think would be good to have going forward. Of course, no pressure to take all these images :) Just some of my thoughts going forward.
And day and night variations for each, but with the same position and angle.
That sounds very interesting actually! I'll see what I can do
Uploaded originals to Google Drive because they're 100mb each ._.
Is this what you're looking for? This was whipped together in 10 minutes, just wanted to make sure I got the right idea.
Uploaded originals to Google Drive because they're 100mb each ._.
Is this what you're looking for? This was whipped together in 10 minutes, just wanted to make sure I got the right idea.
Wow! I think that looks awesome! It's also really cool having even more times of day besides just day and night.
Wow! I think that looks awesome! It's also really cool having even more times of day besides just day and night.
Thanks man! I'll find some more time to do this when I get the chance. As an aside, since the average 8k image clocks in around 10-15 mb each, should the files be hosted somewhere? Currently the images in the current extension are less than a mb each, which is great. Perhaps using a public GitHub pages from this repo may be the way...
*disclaimer i have no idea how github pages work so take that with a grain of salt.
@randy-halim hosting them somewhere is definitely an idea but not directly on github, I'll have a VPS in a few weeks that we could use and would be willing to dedicate to the cause if needed
I don't think it would be crazy to host compressed versions of the images on GitHub. I think a couple hundred megabytes of images shouldn't be a problem at this scale. And as for the extension, the images are currently stored locally in a folder. Of course, in the future, if many images are included, they could be downloaded locally to the extension (possibly stored with the Chrome Storage API? I'm not sure of the performance though).
@sawyerpollard from what I do understand of the Chrome Storage API, it is intended to store parameters or things like that, not whole pictures.
Taking @randy-halim 's pictures at 10MB each (once compressed), and considering 3 pictures per temperature (8 of them), we would be at 240MB of pictures in total. If we would tolerate only 4k pictures (8k screens still are pretty rare), I estimate we would be at around 2MB/picture (not exactly because compression) which would bring down the global size of the pictures to 60MB.
This cancels out the issue #15 because having fluid 4k gif would ask for a lot more storage (loop of 3 second at 30 FPS -> 902MB24 = 4GB of gifs compressible to around 2GB)
So, I am for the idea of 4k pictures for everything while still making 8k versions available for the peoples that would like to use those (by using dev mode on chrome and manually adding the extension) and totally dropping the idea of having animated wallpapers.
Fell free to correct my maths or adding new info about the compressed image size, thoseare quick maths done with very few information.
Taking @randy-halim 's pictures at 10MB each (once compressed), and considering 3 pictures per temperature (8 of them), we would be at 240MB of pictures in total. If we would tolerate only 4k pictures (8k screens still are pretty rare), I estimate we would be at around 2MB/picture (not exactly because compression) which would bring down the global size of the pictures to 60MB.
This cancels out the issue #15 because having fluid 4k gif would ask for a lot more storage (loop of 3 second at 30 FPS -> 90_2MB_24 = 4GB of gifs compressible to around 2GB)
So, I am for the idea of 4k pictures for everything while still making 8k versions available for the peoples that would like to use those (by using dev mode on chrome and manually adding the extension) and totally dropping the idea of having animated wallpapers.
Fell free to correct my maths or adding new info about the compressed image size, thoseare quick maths done with very few information.
Yep, I think that sounds pretty reasonable. I remember when I was testing the extension, I had a lot of problems with cutting down on loading times of images, so ultimately, I settled on 1MB photos (I think progressive JPGs).
I plan on doing some more testing on the maximum image file size that offers fast loading times. I'll also test the WebP image format and see if that offers an improvement.
Personally, I think we should have 4k pictures regardless of the loading time but this is a personal opinion.
After playing around at the export settings for Photoshop, we can actually get these files to be chopped down to a reasonable size (1MB) instead of just exporting at "best quality." There are a few jpg artifacts here and there, but they shouldn't be too bad.
Additionally, having it exported at @1x, @0.5x, and @0.25x means we can have the same images, just for the different screen sizes. @GreatSymphonia you'll get your 4k pictures :p
Photoshop's "Very Good" quality
at 8k:
at 4k:
at 2k (1920x1080):
Photoshop's "Good" quality
8k:
4k:
2k:
This cancels out the issue #15 because having fluid 4k gif would ask for a lot more storage (loop of 3 second at 30 FPS -> 902MB24 = 4GB of gifs compressible to around 2GB)
For #15, I don't think having 4k gifs will work; 1920x1080 sounds more reasonable. However, having a video in the webm format might work, provided a) the video is relatively short, and b) some tinkering is done to reduce the size to say, 5-10 MB.
(note: not sure if GitHub's image hosting will further destroy the image. will see if an alt can be provided)
For #15, I don't think having 4k gifs will work; 1920x1080 sounds more reasonable. However, having a video in the webm format might work, provided a) the video is relatively short, and b) some tinkering is done to reduce the size to say, 5-10 MB.
True, at 1920*1080, it would be doable. But to capture that and have a good loop, that would be hard. I would be curious to see such videos