A lil pet peeve that when you hover over the image area on Identify, it fades a little. Can this be removed?
There’s also little need to fade back the “reviewed” observations, since there’s already a prominent checkmark indicating the observations have been reviewed. Fading them back makes them more difficult to see.
July 20th update regarding the 2nd portion of this request:
Yes, please, and thank you! If hovering needs to be visually apparent, do it with a border or something instead.
I use this to my advantage on occasion to pull out detail on images that aren’t exposed correctly.
Me too, all the time
Hmm, in my experience the fading makes it harder to see details, not easier, even with a dark exposure. I magnify to see the details. But maybe I’m missing something?
personally, i don’t care whether or not they decide to implement this, but if they implement this other thing (https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/edit-images-to-help-with-ids-e-g-brighten-lower-contrast/2376), then maybe that will cover the way you leverage the mouseover highlighting?
Is it possible to do the opposite and turn up the colors? :)
I guess something I’d voted on was closed out, so I added mine there. If we had basic image manipulation options I would be 100% on board with dropping the faded hover.
I like the faded hover as I find it helps to see some details. Some in browser image tools might be cool though, esp if they had keyboard shortcuts (but that’s already on another request).
Similarly, on the identify thumbnails, if you choose to view the ‘reviewed’ items they are faded making it difficult to look at them. Why is that? The user has chosen to see them, so why fade them?
(perhaps this should be a new feature request or a bug report, moderators can decide).
Thanks, I agree – I modified the title and the original post in this topic to reflect that. :)
I would prefer if images weren’t faded on any page, not just Identify!
+1 vote for this feature request (have run out of votes, and don’t seem to be getting any back (maybe I vote for the more complicated features that take longer to implement?)).
See https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/removing-votes-prioritizing-feature-requests/3110
You can view all your votes here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/karoopixie/activity/votes
Voted, because @bouteloua should pretty much get whatever she asks for.
dang, as much as I don’t think anyone should get “special treatment”, I actually can’t object to that! More a case of “always asks for sensible stuff…”
however, I kinda like the greyed out reviewed images. Makes it much clearer what still needs to be looked at. After doing a page, I can glance and see easily what sort of “ratio” I was actually able to review, before hitting the review all! It is a nuisance when flicking over the toggle to see reviewed obs, and I don’t think reversing the faded states in that case would help…
I wouldn’t be too upset at losing it though…
I like the fade on mouse-over as well as on reviewed observations. If people want it removed, I would appreciate it being an option that you can toggle (if that is not too cumbersome to code). It’s not a huge deal but I thought it was a great feature when I started using iNat and I still find it useful.
Would you be OK with another sort of visual indicator, like a border?
I’m personally not a big fan of the “fade” on mouseover, but I’ve learned to live with it. I can’t say I understand not wanting observations marked as reviewed not faded on the grid view. Isn’t the whole point of marking something reviewed saying that you don’t want to examine it anymore?
I could understand fading the thumbnails on the default filter (which is reviewed=false), but not when it’s reviewed=true. I’m ambivalent about reviewed=any. Maybe the text could stay faded though?
A border or a cut-off corner would be a good compromise. It also wouldn’t get in the way of the thumbnails no matter what reviewed= is set to.
