Withdrawn: No more blurry album covers!

[Miss Sissy Princess]

I think Swizzle and I were talking at cross-purposes. My reasoning for higher than 800 pixel images is "future-proofing" - and I should have said that I would expect the grid layout to be updated to make use of any higher resolutions for very high resolution monitors (8K is coming).  But that's not a must-have right now and I realize that it wouldn't buy anything without that corresponding change to the grid layout.

Ah, of course since the routine knows the source image width and height it would be trivial to check that and only downsample the image if target W * H < source W * H. Good idea :-)

See, I don't just cause strife and anger. 

If all of your cover art is 600x600, setting a maximum thumbnail size of 800x800 would effectively be "bypass."  Everything would be stored at its native resolution.

What I might try is having separate options for resolution and quality. Something like below. There's plenty of time b4 7 ships to get this feature nailed down.

I think that's the best approach.  

I'd make it clear that the user would be choosing the maximum resolution (rather than upsampling small images into larger ones) as that is important for all the reasons we've been discussing (bandwidth, storage, RAM, etc.).

Please consider a PNG option as the highest setting under "Quality."  Like MP3, JPEG is designed for a single encoding from a lossless source.  To use an analogy for the resizing of cover art, would you start with a 24/96K WAV, encode that to a 192K MP3, transcode that to 128K MP3, and then decode that and resample it to 16/48K WAV for playback?

Thanks, Tim.