2007-12-31, 01:02
Hello, I am using Dec 09 2007 XBMC build.
My AdvancedSettings.xml has this information.
<advancedsettings>
<thumbsize>512</thumbsize>
</advancedsettings>
All my thumbnails for videos are in .tbn format on a NAS box.
I deleted all records from XBMC/UserData/Thumbnails/Video/ directory.
When I started XBMC, it cached all the thumnails from NAS box to local drive. Unfortunately all the cached images look very poor when it displays on my 52 inch LCD screen. I have set XBMC to 1080i resolution.
When I compared the quality of thumbnail on the NAS server and on the XBMC local drive (cached by XBMC), it is totally different.
Here is an example.
http://maxupload.com/img/F8722702.jpg - cached thumbnail image from XBMC/UserData/Thumbnails/Video/ dir
http://maxupload.com/img/153E50DC.jpg - From my NAS server.
Why there is so much quality difference between the original image and the XBMC cached one?
thanks
My AdvancedSettings.xml has this information.
<advancedsettings>
<thumbsize>512</thumbsize>
</advancedsettings>
All my thumbnails for videos are in .tbn format on a NAS box.
I deleted all records from XBMC/UserData/Thumbnails/Video/ directory.
When I started XBMC, it cached all the thumnails from NAS box to local drive. Unfortunately all the cached images look very poor when it displays on my 52 inch LCD screen. I have set XBMC to 1080i resolution.
When I compared the quality of thumbnail on the NAS server and on the XBMC local drive (cached by XBMC), it is totally different.
Here is an example.
http://maxupload.com/img/F8722702.jpg - cached thumbnail image from XBMC/UserData/Thumbnails/Video/ dir
http://maxupload.com/img/153E50DC.jpg - From my NAS server.
Why there is so much quality difference between the original image and the XBMC cached one?
thanks