Bug in Screenshot saving

[rauch]

Situation: You have made exactly 999 screenshots (yes, it happens, I did it...), now make another screenshot.

It will get saved as "elscreen.png", having no numbers at all.

When you make another screenshot, this elscreen.png gets overwritten all the time, losing your previously made screenshot.

[bigkav]

I had same thing happen to me, so i moved all screenshots from the folder into a 2nd folder a made "Screenshots 2" and it will restart from 001 and on.

[bluap]

I've had a look at the code and it is behaving exactly as intended. Things could be changed to do something else but I struggle to think what else could be done apart increase the number of imaged saved. bigkav's work around is fine IMHO.

 

One thing that could be added rather easily would be a warning message written to the console that the 1000 count has been exceeded. Alternatively, we could fail to create the new image and display an error message in the console.

[Learner]

I've had a look at the code and it is behaving exactly as intended. Things could be changed to do something else but I struggle to think what else could be done apart increase the number of imaged saved. bigkav's work around is fine IMHO.

 

One thing that could be added rather easily would be a warning message written to the console that the 1000 count has been exceeded. Alternatively, we could fail to create the new image and display an error message in the console.

Why can't it use the 4 digit number? That would make the most sense.

[bluap]

Why can't it use the 4 digit number? That would make the most sense.

I didn't say we couldn't, in fact I thought I said we could, but that really only delays the problem. Also, some OS/file systems do not like a large number of images in a single directory. If this is really important, we ought to consider some other scheme. May be multiple directories and/or date based file names. That would be post the 1.8.0 release of course, a simple addition of a console message could perhaps be done before.

[LabRat]

At some point can we switch to jpg output - 1000 500kb files is half a gig of images, if you have your system set up to display images as icons that could cause rather a large overhead

[Theladin]

What about just using a date/time stamp for the filename?

[Roja]

At some point can we switch to jpg output - 1000 500kb files is half a gig of images, if you have your system set up to display images as icons that could cause rather a large overhead

 

That would be really great since many people don't understand how to convert png->jpg when posting on forums and such.

 

 

And I think a warning in the console would be good enough..just something like "you've reached the max capacity of screenshots. Please move all to another folder to enable screenshots again"

[revi]

And I think a warning in the console would be good enough..just something like "you've reached the max capacity of screenshots. Please move all to another folder to enable screenshots again"

 

but please, give this warning after saving the last image possible (or a few before), don't give it for the first image that cannot be saved... Rather nasty if the shots were taken as proof of serping or rule breaking

 

As another option: have the client create a new directory?

[bluap]

And I think a warning in the console would be good enough..just something like "you've reached the max capacity of screenshots. Please move all to another folder to enable screenshots again"

I've added this console warning message when the maximum number of screen shots has been reached:

"You have reached the maximum capacity for screen shots. Please move them all to another folder, otherwise this image will be overwritten next time."

 

I've also added a console message giving the file name each time an image is saved.

[Gilrain]

as already discussed elsewhere, you will lose quality when you switch from lossless compression (png-zip) to lossy jpeg. If both of the libraries are in the client already (?), maybe it could be made configurable with the default being 'jpg' , so that not-so-savy users have it easier with forum uploads, but the others can still have saved all their pixels with the real colordepth ?

 

just a proposal...