![]() It's why third party tools (like the one I linked in my first comment) that don't rely on it fare so much better in that regard. File Explorer is notoriously bad with thumbnail handling (see MS community link). You should see identical behavior in Opus and Explorer for those files.īut that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. IME, most formats do not take that long to thumbnail, so if you're finding thumbnail generation takes too long, solving that might make the question of when generation happens moot, since it should be fairly fast (unless on slow/remote media or something like that, which you may not be able to speed up that much). I think there are some video thumbnailers which work that way, but it isn't something I've looked at in detail myself. One thing you can do is use something which embeds thumbnails into the files and then returns those to programs (like Opus and File Explorer) when they ask for them. (Without tracking all operations done in all folders all the time (has its own drawbacks, and not really possible with removable media, network drives, etc.) or reading the file's contents (as slow as thumbnailing it).) If a file has a new name the next time you enter that folder, there's no way to know it is the same as an older file, at least in general. I doubt you will find many programs which work the way you want. There is no way for software to know that the visual aspects of the file have not changed if the file has changed. But why does it need to regen on something like a filename change? If there is a visual change then sure, regenerate. My plugins are all unchecked (although they used to be checked - except for movie - and things seemed the same), my settings are as follows: If I revisit the folder later we're back to square one. Then it generates anywhere from 30 to 80% of the thumbnails, gets stuck, I refresh, it takes 30 more seconds to regenerate those same thumbnails (why) then proceeds to generate the rest. Every time I visit a folder with a lot of pictures or videos I'm staring at a wall of thumbnails for a good 5 minutes. I've set my thumbnail cache size to as high as it went, and Opus is installed on an Nvme SSD, though some files that are being accessed are on hard drives (local). That's not to say File Explorer isn't slow, it is! But File Explorer is admittedly not that high of a bar in the first place (otherwise none of us would be here). Thumbnails are there to have a rough idea of what the file is, it's better to have that quickly rather than wasting time waiting for a "precise" version. ![]() I imagine most people don't wanna sit and wait for several minutes just because they edited a minute little thing (that might not reflect visually in the first place). Can I make it so it doesn't regenerate them even if they've changed? Sounds like an odd choice for the default behavior. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |