-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
mediapy display_images()
downsamples images seemingly arbitrarily....
#42
Comments
Hi Eric! I can't seem to be able to reproduce it. import mediapy as media
images = {f'image{index}': media.color_ramp((512, 512)) for index in range(32)}
media.show_images(images) and it shows 32 images of size (512, 512, 3). In Jupyter Lab, it shows 32 shrunk images such that all of them appear in the window width. Please give us more details. Perhaps try Chrome Developer Tools (Control-Shift-i) to examine the native image resolution? |
Hi Hugues! All the input image resolutions I reported were obtained printing the In my use-case I get an
Whether or not I convert the input
|
Are you using Colab? Please see my shared Colab notebook in https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1pkTsS0v40kbf66d6a_rfMS1V6VrS247d?usp=sharing |
Issue tested with version: #41
a) If I call
media.show_images()
once passing it a dict of 32 images, each with shape (512, 512, 3), it stubbornly displays a row matrix of images that are (256, 256, 3) each.b) If I call
media.show_images()
32 times passing it a dict with a single image each time, each with shape (512, 512, 3), it displays the images at the correct resolution (however the images are displayed one below each other which is not what I want).c) In case a), if I pass the argument
height=512
then the images are displayed pixelated 2x: it looks like mediapy makes a 256x256 internal image buffer and displays it pixelated at 512x512.d) Passing
downsample=False
doesn't fix the issue either (too easy-no points).e) I also have a repro case where it dowsamples from 480 to 240 so this seems like a 2x downsample bug.
f) Aha!!! It looks like displaying a smaller number of images (6 vs. 32) works as intended.
Looks like it is some kind of cap on total memory it can consume?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: