NightAngel

50 minutes ago, Stuart Silvester said:

That's expected, due to lazy-loading.

The Javascript asks the browser which formats it can play and adds the appropriate one to the src attribute. However, I do see there's an issue there were the second source element isn't being parsed properly to have the data-video-source attribute. I was able to reproduce that and commit a fix for it.

Thank you for your prompt and efficient handling of my request. 👍🏻

When no src attribute is specified in the <video> tag, the browser is free to choose the source with which it is compatible.

But if I don't put a src attribute in the <video> tag then IPB (I assume) modifies my <video> tag to add the src attribute of the first <source> tag contained in the <video> tag.

In this way, the browser ignores the different sources offered and reads the src attribute of the <video> tag in all cases.

The idea is that a browser that supports the H265 codec can play .mp4 video, while a browser that supports the AV1 codec can play .webm video.

Hi !

I don't know if my message is in the right place, but... I'll give it a try 😜

When I switch the editor to "Source" mode to enter HTML code, if I use an HTML5 <video> tag, the system automatically adds a "src" argument (to this tag).

In fact, the system uses the src argument of the first <source> tag it finds inside the <video> tag.

Text entered :

<video>
  <source src="movie.mp4" type="video/mp4">
  <source src="movie.ogg" type="video/ogg">
</video>

Recorded text :

<video data-video-embed="" id="ips_uid_5381_4" src="movie.mp4">
  <source data-video-src="movie.mp4" src="movie.mp4" type="video/mp4">
  <source src="movie.ogg" type="video/ogg">
</video>

I could be wrong, but it seems that by doing this, the browser that doesn't support mp4 format can't switch to the ogg format source.

This is just an example, I work with H265/HEVC and AV1 codecs, but it doesn't matter.

If you have any proposals, suggestions or opinions...

Thank you very much and have a nice day !

19 minutes ago, teraßyte said:

Except for Edge (which can enable it with a runtime flag) all other browsers do support it by default currently: https://caniuse.com/avif 🤔

 

(IE doesn't count 😋)

Yes, yes, I'm just saying that Invision doesn't integrate the image (embed) for display directly into the message content.

Hello !

In future releases, will it be possible to display .avif images directly in messages ?

At the moment, the .avif file is displayed as an attachment, even though the system saves it perfectly and my browser (obviously) supports this format.

I think that allowing this format in the Gallery application (as well as in the others, I haven't checked) would be a good thing.

That'll be all! 😜

I read the description of this very interesting plugin.

I think it would be interesting to make it compatible with the "Community Map" plugin map (submitted by @Martin A.).

Well, that's just an idea 🙂

19 hours ago, AlexWebsites said:

Hard to believe with how widely iPhones are used and how much is accessed on mobile that we don’t have this as native support yet. I started this topic over two years ago…lol.

That's why I closely follow the developments in this field. From their iOS, my users post pictures in heic and videos in .mov... nothing that is displayed directly on my forum. I'm not criticizing people who can't do anything about it, it's just a rather sad observation...

I would still have to tweak a script using FFmpeg instead of converting all the .mov manually with the famous Handbrake software.

On 7/13/2020 at 5:10 PM, bfarber said:

The format is not widely supported by backend libraries yet unfortunately (including PHP's native GD library). 

A lot of changes in the libraries these last months/weeks.

• ImageMagick : https://github.com/ImageMagick/Website/blob/main/ChangeLog.md
• GD via libheif : https://github.com/libgd/libgd

Hello !

I have exactly the same problem as you: sending the photos goes perfectly well but things go wrong at the second stage; when it comes to processing. Sometimes (but often) only the first image of the sent batch is processed and then the lightbox disappears... as you indicate.

I never found the origin of the problem and I have tried many times with several browsers without modules, etc. I even switched the forum language to English, completely disabled cloudflare, my anti-virus, etc.

I never found any explanation while everything seems to work fine with another administrator of my forum: same operating system, same browser... the only difference seems to be the fact that I use an ADSL connection while he is equipped with optical fiber.

I have of course tried with larger and smaller batches, with different file sizes, etc.

As soon as I send ten pictures (for example) and go to processing, the first picture is well processed (the lightbox disappears) and the other nine files remain in the table "ipb_gallery_images_upload"... 😈

Anyway, personally, I stopped looking for the reason why my other administrator is not facing this problem while we seem to be in quite similar dispositions... we must have missed a parameter.

You will have to use ImageMagick and get your hands dirty 😎

Maybe never ? 

On 9/26/2020 at 12:53 AM, ekforum said:

BUMP 🙂 

Any update on this since October 2019, nearly a full year later and no update. When I tried with 4.5.x it said that it doesn't support 7.7.0 or higher

Would be great to have the latest version supported, as installing older versions of Elastic search could be a security risk. 

7.9.3. is available 🙂 

Please

I totally agree ! 🙂

Hi !

When I send an image (jpg format), the system seems to modify it automatically while its size is strictly identical to its original size.

The lack of resizing is normal since I checked "unlimited size."

I can't explain this intervention by the system, the JPG quality is "100%" and I encounter the same phenomenon when using ImageMagick.

Image evidence :

Can you fill me in ?

An excellent idea!

I think it would be interesting if the user could have checkboxes so that he can really select what he wants to download... it doesn't seem to me that this is the case.

I will try this module quickly !

Thanks 🙂

Cool ! It's imperative that I test it !

I also hope that a similar solution will be integrated IPB4 eg :-) It seems to me that Mandrill is natively integrated but interactions between IPB and mandrill are limited without the use of such a plugin...

Thank you very much and good day !