I have some image urls which I want to cache locally and save so that I don't need to make a web request again and again as needed.
Now, I am confused whether there is any significant benefit of using webclient's openreadasync method over bitmap for fetching the image for first time for saving it to IsolatedStorage.
For me, I think bitmap would be a better option as I would be able to get a event for progress.
This post gives good info on various image caching options.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/swick/archive/2011/04/07/image-tips-for-windows-phone-7.aspx
Matt mentioned the fact that default image caching only works per session. So if you are implementing your own Image caching, then you will have to implement a image downloader for which the WebClient OpenReadAsync provides a way to store file locally
If you were't considering a local cache, UriSource would have been the choice.
If you want to cache images beyond the current application instance lifetime, have a look at http://blogs.msdn.com/b/delay/archive/2010/10/04/there-s-no-substitute-for-customer-feedback-improving-windows-phone-7-application-performance-now-a-bit-easier-with-lowprofileimageloader-and-deferredloadlistbox-updates.aspx which will show a way of saving the images to IsolatedStorage and then display it from there. This means you won't have to get it over the network each time the app is run.
If you're using this for lots of images be sure to manage the images you save as well so you don't fill up the disk with lots of old images you'll never need again.
Related
I am making android app that must show a lot of images from my REST API. I want to download images, and the next time check for images' name. If the image exists show them from the phone otherwise download from server.
Now I'm using Retrofit for my network requests and Glide for show images. But I have not good idea for solve this issue.
If needed I can change the network library or image loading library.
Thanks in advance
NOTE: This question might be too broad for the liking of S.O.
What you want to do is make what is known as a cache. The idea is that you have a unique identifier (often refered to as a key) for each object in the cache, such as an md5 sum of the image data, or original name + date of creation.
When you want to display an image, you first check if the image exists in the cache. If it exists simply return with the image from cache. if it does not exist, start the download and upon completion you insert the image into the cache.
Here is an example implementation that does what you want. I cannot vouch for it's quality because I never tried it.
I'm contemplating on how to store images in my new site.
Should I save the images directly to the database
OR
should I upload them to my server, while storing the path in my database?
Also, should it be the second choice, how does one retrieve the path of a file he uploaded previously?
You should definitely go with the second option as you can take advantage of the user's browser caching these images after the initial request. It also means your database wont be hit constantly for large files which is always a bad thing.
In CodeIgniter there are various parameters you can use to get the name / full file path to store in the database.
See http://ellislab.com/codeigniter%20/user-guide/libraries/file_uploading.html
Also take a look at this great SO question Storing Images in DB - Yea or Nay?
I tried CI's own libraries , its good but not best, Image moo solved all my problems, uploading, resize, crop etc..
http://www.matmoo.com/digital-dribble/codeigniter/image_moo/
The first bit before the _ is the id of the pin...what are the ZZtfjmGQ used for? I'm assuming the _c is probalby something to do with size.
http://media-cache-lt0.pinterest.com/upload/33284484717557666_HZtfjmFQ_c.jpg
I'm building an image upload service in node.js and was curious what other sites do to store the image.
Final images are served from a CDN, evident by the subdomain in the URL. The first bit, as you pointed out, is the id of the image, the second bit is a UID to get around cache limitations for image versions, and the last bit is image size.
A limitation of CDNs is the inability to process the image after upload. To get around this, my service uploads the files to my Nodejs server where I then serve the image back to the client. I use a jQuery script the user can use to crop the image which sends crop coordinates back to the server and I use ImageMagick to create the various sizes of the the uploaded image. You can obviously eliminate the crop step and just use aspect ratio's to automatically create the needed image sizes. I then upload the final images to the CDN for hosting to end users.
When a user needs to update a photo already in the CDN, the user uploads to nodejs server, images are processed and sized, the UID hash is updated and then uploaded to the CDN. If you want to keep things clean (and cut on CDN cost) you can delete the old "version" at this step as well. However, in my service I give the option to backtrack to an older version if needed.
The rest of the CRUD actions are pretty self explanatory. You can read a list of images available from the CDN using the ID (My service has a user id as well as an image id to allow more robust query operations) and deleting is as simple as identifying the image you want to delete.
I need a way for cache images and html files in PhoneGap from my site. I'm planning that users will see site without internet connection like it will be with it. But I see information only about sql data storing, but how can I store images (and use later).
To cache images check out this library -of which I'm the creator-:
imgcache.js
. It's designed for the very purpose of caching images using the local filesystem. If you check out the examples you will see that it can also detect when an image fails to be loaded (because you're offline or you have a very bad connection) and then replaces it automatically with the cached image. The user of the webapp doesn't even notice it's offline.
As for html pages.. if they're html static files, they could be stored locally in the web app (file:// in phonegap).
If they're dynamically generated pages, check the localStorage API if you have a small amount of data, otherwise the filesystem API.
For my web app I retrieve only json data from my server (and process/render it using Backbone+Underscore). The json payload is stored into the localStorage. If the application gets offline, it will fetch json data from the localStorage instead of the server (home-baked fork of Backbone.dualStorage)
You then get the full offline experience: pages+images.
Caching like you might need for simple offline operation is not exactly that easy.
Your first option is the cache manifest. It has some limitations (like the size of the cache) but might work for you since it was designed to do what you want.
Another options is that you can store content on the disk of the device using the file system APIs. This has some drawbacks like security and the fact that you have to load the file from a path / url that is different than you might normally load it from on the web. Check out the hydra plugin for an example of this.
One final option might be to store stuff in localStorage (which has the benefit of being private on all platforms) and then pull it out of there when needed ... that means base64'ing all your images tho so that is a pretty big departure from just standard caching.
Caching is very much possible on Android OS. but on Apple as stated above there are limitations with the size of the images and cache size etc.
If you are willing to integrate and allow the caching on iOS you can use "cache manifest" to do so. but keep the draw backs and limitations in mind.
Also
if you want to save the file to Documents folder under my App, Apple will reject your App. The reason is the system backup all data under Documents folder to iCould after iOS6, so Apple does not allow big data like images or JSON file which could sync from your server again to keep in this folder.
So there is another work around which is good So one can use LocalFileSystem.TEMPORARY instead. It does not save the data to Library/Cache, but it save data to temp folder of App, which does not been auto backup to iCloud and not auto deleted either.
Regards
Rajeev
I've got an app on Google App Engine that will accept image uploads from users. The problem that I envision is that users will upload these images directly from their cameras, and file sizes are often greater than 1MB, which is the limit for the image API (which would be used to resize the images).
What's the best way to accept the upload of say a 1.5MB image file, and resize it to under 1MB?
While this is not clear in the App Engine documentation, this is possible by using a combination of the Blobstore and the Image Manipulation Service.
You must:
Upload the Image into the Blobstore
Retrieve the Image from the Blobstore
Perform the Image Manipulation with an Image resulting in less than 1mb in size
I've written up a post about this -> http://socialappdev.com/uploading-and-re-sizing-large-images-on-app-engine-11-2010.
Here are two (similar) ways to solve this:
If you want to keep everything controlled yourself, you can put a resize script on a server of yours, which takes the URL to the raw uploaded image (which can be up to 10MB due to HTTP response size limit, but you would have to store it as 1MB chunks in the datastore), downloads it from your application, resizes it, and then POSTs it back to your application. All this interaction would need some kind of authorization of course, so that it can't be abused. Alternatively, POST the image directly to your external server, but then you have to either send the other form data back to your application, or use a separate form for the image upload.
Use an external imaging service. I would recommend Picnik. See their API documentation. As you can see, it lets you make a form that posts the image directly to their servers, then the user can edit the image (and resize), then the image is posted back to your server. With this solution you have to upload the image in a separate form, since Picnik receives all your POST data.
I recommend point 2, because it doesn't require you to go around Google App Engine limitations and since your users are uploading images straight from the camera, they will probably want to do something with them anyways (such as crop.)
That's a conundrum. The "obvious" answer, using google.appengine.api.images.resize, won't work because it's too big. :) So you will have to use third-party software, either on the server (which will be tricky because of App Engine's limitations) or the cilent (e.g. a Java uploader).