Only show suitable wallpapers

[Cassidy James Blaede]

We should only show images that make sense to be wallpapers. Basically, we should filter out images that have a really small dimension.

[Danielle Foré (danrabbit)]

For a little backstory, this comes into effect if you select a custom folder (or pictures) as a backgrounds directory.

So what we might want to do here is grab the display resolution and only show images larger than that resolution?

[Cassidy James Blaede (cassidyjames)]

Backstory: I have a bunch of random small images in my Pictures folder, which makes that part of the plug useless.

[Cassidy James Blaede (cassidyjames)]

Possible solution: only show images whose x and y dimensions are equal to or larger than your display resolution, though if you have a very hi res display, that'd limit your options.

Another possible solution: show images equal to or larger than some minimum size, say, 1024x600?

[Danielle Foré (danrabbit)]

Another thought: do we care about aspect ratio? Do we want to allow an image that is some random aspect ratio like 13:7 ?

[Cameron Norman (cameronnemo)]

I don't think the aspect ratio should be limited. Some people may like having portrait images as their wallpaper and then a suitable background color. One's display res shouldn't be the bar to reach either. Some people may not care about a little pixelation if they have a 1080p display, or they may not want the wallpaper to fill the whole screen. I think having a resolution threshold is good.

Another idea is to make the plug say "Showing Wallpapers in Foo" where Foo is the folder and then having an option to use a custom image as a wallpaper. Only wallpapers (some higher up resolution ratio) would be shown in the view, if one wanted to use a non-wallpaper, they would have to locate it in the file system.

[David Gomes (davidgomes)]

 Many people like small images and they like to "tile" them so they repeat and repeat for cool effects.

[Danielle Foré (danrabbit)]

We don't offer "tile" as an option, so I'm not really concerned about that.

I think Cassidy's solution of some minimum size would probably be the most conservative solution. 1024 x 600 sounds reasonable. I'm not sure why you'd ever have a wallpaper image that is that small.

[Danielle Foré (danrabbit)]

I'm actually going to "won't fix" this one because it conflicts with Felipe's "Wallpaperize" concept. I think he has a nice design that fixes this issue and gives people the flexibility to use whatever size (and aspect ratio) images they want