changing video default width behaviour - adding a permission to manually set vid resolution

GameCollision - March 8, 2008 - 23:12
Project:Video
Version:5.x-1.x-dev
Component:User interface
Category:task
Priority:critical
Assigned:fax8
Status:patch (to be ported)
Description

Hello. There's a default max width I want for all my videos on the site, however I don't want every video stretched to that size. Is it possible to just have the normal video width if it's smaller than the size that I specified? Also, is there a way to just have the default height of the video as well? Right now it just makes it the same as the width I specify and that makes it look weird for some videos.

#1

MrGood - March 14, 2008 - 19:12

This is a problem for me too. I have 4 main sizes on my website:

Widescreen - 640x360 and 352x192

Normal - 640x480 and 320x240

all of these being in WMV format.

The default width causes problems when i play the smaller resolutions because in order to get the higher resolutions to work i need to set this to 640 and when this is set to 640 there is a big border around the smaller rez videos. This looks very ugly.

Perhaps if you integrate an automatic window resizer to wrap around these videos and also a few more resolution boxes and also a custom resolution option for when adding a video in.

I much prefered it in version 5 when you could just specify your resolution on the video!!!

#2

fax8 - March 15, 2008 - 12:09
Category:support request» task
Priority:normal» critical
Assigned to:Anonymous» fax8

ok.. working on this one.

#3

fax8 - March 15, 2008 - 13:52
Status:active» needs review

see below

#4

fax8 - March 15, 2008 - 13:51

well.. the attached patch changes the way video module uses resolution stuff.

  • make the administrator able to disable the default width scaling (by leaving the default width field empty in the administration of video module)
  • adds a permission called "manually set video resolution"
  • users with this permission can manually set the video resolution

The idea would be to incorporate a bit of Javascript as well.. so that when on the video form the user choose "manually set" the fields "width" and "height" are automatically displayed (Previously they were hidden). But this will came next days.

So.. please try the attached patch and let me know what you think about it, if it meets your needs, you see improvements possible, suggestions etc.

Thanks,

Fabio

AttachmentSize
video_manual_sizing.patch 6.17 KB

#5

fax8 - March 15, 2008 - 14:48
Title:Sizing questions» changing video default width behaviour - adding a permission to manually set vid resolution

better title..

#6

GameCollision - March 15, 2008 - 17:41

Will this be going into the next development snapshot? because I have no clue how to apply patches.

#7

fax8 - March 15, 2008 - 19:00

I would like to have some user feedback before commit this one to the -dev version.

Attached you find the latest video.module file (from the latest snapshot - zipped) patched with the above patch.
Remember to update to the latest snapshot before using this one.

AttachmentSize
video.module.zip 12.08 KB

#8

GameCollision - March 16, 2008 - 03:41

It's not working for me. I select 'manually set' for resolution and I type in the resolution but it just reverts it to 4:3.

#9

MrGood - March 16, 2008 - 09:55

its working for me. Much better. What you need to do is make sure you go back to the menu and make the default width box blank. Then once you done that you can either set preset resolutions or use manually set resolution. But just to let you know its working with WMV. I havent tried anything else.

#10

GameCollision - March 16, 2008 - 12:41

Ahh, that's what I needed to do. Works great now.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to make this patch, I really appreciate it.

#11

gd1008 - October 11, 2008 - 21:31

That patch is great. Now resolution can be changed according to the size of the video. I tested on QuickTime (.mov) and .wmv files and it works perfectly.
Thank you very much.

#12

pyutaros - October 18, 2008 - 03:23

Does this mean that the module is NOT in fact abandoned as was previously stated here? If this is the case will it be worthwhile for me to port this module to D6?
Thanks,
Jonathan

#13

hostilemonkeys - March 30, 2009 - 15:51

#14

heshanmw - September 30, 2009 - 20:58
Status:needs review» patch (to be ported)
 
 

Drupal is a registered trademark of Dries Buytaert.