Viewer.js – JavaScript image viewer
github.com
github.com
But I guess that people who know stuff about photography will say the photos won't get the needed exposure...
<a href="photo.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="photo_thumb.jpg"/></a>
I prefer it without the target attribute, generally because I prefer navigating back than closing a window. This is especially true on phones. Power users on desktop computers usually know how to open in a tab using the third mouse button or Ctrl-clicking.
I would like some kind of reverse Ctrl-click, that would force links to open in the same window as the one I'm currently in. I just don't know how this should work, if I click a link while I'm filling in a form. :-/
It's 2016, let's not propagate the mess that was Lenna: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna
They probably should also use creative commons images - if they're not already.
It would be weird if it was a collection of various images from different times of the same person, or a collection of female celebrities.
But it's a series of images from the same photoshoot. It's a perfectly reasonable grouping to make.
Its just an example gallery that happens to be of a photo shoot of Emma Watson. The photo's aren't even remotely suggestive... Are your female co-workers that sensitive and/or unable to rationalize? Would you have kept looking at the demo if it was filled with similar pictures of Brat Pitt?
Not trying to be mean or anything I genuinely don't understand and would like to know.
EDIT:
I do see and agree that a more varied subject matter would probably do better to showcase the usage of the plugin but I still think that your reaction is slightly extreme as it seems like you look down on your female co-workers by removing their agency in the matter :S (although that might be taking it to the extreme from my side...)
EDIT: I'm not making any point about the appropriateness of this for your workplace. That depends entirely on your workplace.
Whether or not this is sexism is one thing, but it's still a very real concern.
Hahaha I can see how that'd be a problem but OP specifically mentioned the gender of his co-workers which struck me as weird.
Although I do question whether OP meant the same thing as he specifically mentioned the gender of his co-workers which in such a scenario would be rather irrelevant.
Since I'm in the comfort of my own home I totally overlooked this option :S
But that's not the point. Sexism, in reality, favours men and hurts women. That's why an image of Brad Pitt is okay, whereas an image of Emma Watson is not okay! (and by the way, they are suggestive)
Any argument that goes "But if we switched genders, then it would be fine!" is completely missing the point that we are still living in a de-facto patriarchy, where objectification of men is not even an issue.
In any case, I found the choice of images immature and closed the website right away.
That makes you the sexist in this instance.
> Any argument that goes "But if we switched genders, then it would be fine!" is completely missing the point that we are still living in a de-facto patriarchy, where objectification of men is not even an issue.
I'm talking about his co-workers reactions to said images (whether Brad Pitt or Emma Watson) not about sexism. As a matter of fact I don't see how the two are related at all, what in this scenario is sexist? But since you brought it up; I do not agree with you at all because I think sexism (or the "patriarchy" whatever you want to call it) hurts men AND women. Even if it might not be the same type of hurt or even have the same effects. I think the biggest problem for us as people (humanity) is when we start quantifying and differentiating between different types of "hurt".
> In any case, I found the choice of images immature and closed the website right away.
Pictures of an adult woman's face are immature? You say it is suggestive but I don't find them suggestive at all, does that mean I'm immature or not?
Like I mentioned in my original post I don't understand the standpoint of OP and neither do I understand yours. What makes these images immature and what validates the OP's reaction that he wanted to protect his female co-workers from this imagery. Or did he try to protect himself from the reactions of his female co-workers to this imagery?
Again none of this is meant to be taken as an insult or attack I would genuinely like to understand why you feel this way.
Always and never are strong terms that I'm not sure of in this context but I understand and agree (to an extend), thank you for explaining :)
As far as whether OP's reaction was justified I guess we'll have to agree to disagree or something...
EDIT: Although I'm not sure that your "solution" to the problem (looking at picture galleries of hot males) is one that works...
(just kidding)
In that regard, it's uneven representation moreso than sexism.
The majority of fashion is targeted at women, therefore there are more female models, therefore there are more quality pictures of women out there than men, therefore it makes sense to use it as a test image gallery.
Also, if the code is being used to display test images, this is probably closer to the normal subject matter it'll be used for.
I actually complained once to my favourite label about their very limited choice of fashion for men. They replied that it's because men don't buy very much, which is funny since men don't even have the choice to begin with.
> therefore there are more quality pictures of women out there than men, therefore...
It's a bad reason to use the status quo to justify itself.
If you peek over our leads shoulder, you'd see she nearly universally uses close up facials of 'sexy' men or whoever happens to be the latest group of fashion models on ANTM.
People use images that appeal to them. They're not going for broad universal appeal.
----
Also I find it highly ironic that people in this thread are suggesting we replace fully clothed images of a woman who became famous for doing a children's TV series, with images of Lena Söderberg 1972 playboy centerfold because it is 'traditional'.
If people will take offense to Emma being 'sexy', I'm not sure what they're going to do if you use the full spread of images that the famous "Lena" shot was cut from. After all the point of this image viewer is to show different images, is it not?
Is not an issue to who? Just because women face it more, does not mean that men do not face it. Winner does not take all, everyone just loses.
If seeing attractive women "hurts women", then by that you have to concede that the same happens to men when it comes to attractive men. Not only that, but "sexism" against men occurs on multiple levels in our society, so much so that we are actively blind to it, see your comment as well as below.
>"Any argument that goes "But if we switched genders, then it would be fine!" is completely missing the point that we are still living in a de-facto patriarchy, where objectification of men is not even an issue."
It's odd how you claim "defacto" patriarchy, then concede that this patriarchy allows the objectification of men to occur as a non "issue". The fact that it's okay in this society to objectify men but not women is not proof of patriarchy, if anything it's proof of "matriarchy" (if we borrow feminist-naming conventions).
We are still far from true equality, and it is something we should strive for as an enlightened society. But to blatantly have double-standards while claiming systemic inequality is quite disingenuous.
They're not even a part of the same cultural gestalt.
Isn't it possible this is just an example of mistaken manners when dealing with a foreign culture?
What about the objectification of men that calls them "warriors" and sends them off to serve their country as tools of the state? To get killed doing that? That sort of objectification isn't an issue? Or we only worry about the case where women have the freedom to pose in front of a camera and get paid for it if they want to?
No one can really opt out of identification in terms of their beauty. Both men and women face the reality of being judged by their looks, but women bear the brunt of it due to cultural considerations.
In some cultures, as women age they no longer have to deal with being judged as harshly on looks but in the West beauty is a point of interest deeply into a woman's middle-aged life at the least, and even people who are technically the age of grandparents like Hillary Clinton are judged on their looks.
As a side-benefit, even if the portraits are laviscious since its 'classical art', many people don't care.
https://fengyuanchen.github.io/viewerjs/img/emma-watson-4.jp...
I feel like using an unknown model in the photos would even be an improvement, but still inappropriate.
I find no issue with it and had it open at work. Emma watson is slightly older than myself maybe that's why.
Totally unnecessarily sexualized (though very attractive, just not quite appropriate for work!) photos.
If that's too sexualized for you or your workplace, I'm rather shocked.
How sad.
If you think a critical comment qualifies as an attempt at censorship, then by the same logic, your own comments are an attempt to censor the OP.
I do web dev work in an open office area where I'm surrounded by people who don't really understand what I get paid to do.
My boss is aware however, and I'm very confident that me investigating new js image viewer libs, browsing and posting on HN falls with in my job description.
I instantly closed the demo gallery because as much as it annoys me the perception of those around me matters.
I'm completely on board with your thoughts that these images are SFW and it shouldn't be an issue. I'm confident that I would be able to rationally explain why I happen to have a page full of Emma Watson pictures open. However, I wouldn't get the chance to explain. If someone around me noticed they'd immediately think that I was slacking off and looking at pictures of cute women on the internet.
If the demo images were of basically any other SFW subject matter it wouldn't be an issue.
I totally agree that the whole situation that this is even a concern is annoying as all hell. That doesn't stop it from being a thing.
:(
No you don't. You're just an attention whore. Or you probably do not interact that much with people, or else you'd know nobody sane would react negatively to some nine headshots of a person. Stop tumultising stupid things.
And Lenna is a good image for testing for various purposes, and it is a nice, beautiful image to see when doing a boring thing like learning an image processing software. And it contains some nice colour work.
If you catalog all photos taken, they are mostly going to be of people. And, in particular, attractive photos of women - you won't see men take selfies as much as women do.
This should be your common use case in your software development. Optimize your software for that primary use case first, and then you can worry about other use cases like landscapes or men.
I don't get it
Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.
For all the over the top options that ViewerJS seems to have, I find it strange that a simple 'click background to close' option is missing.
What seems to be missing is the forward/backward links within each 50% of the image width.
Sweet, I lucked out.
However, i did experience a blocking wait for > 5 seconds "Waiting for http://.." some fusion ads or something. In UX terms, it is quite important that image loading ( -> fullscreen on click) is not blocked.
And simpler too.