New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 619031 link

Starred by 3 users

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Owner: ----
Closed: Feb 2018
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Android
Pri: 3
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Improve tab switcher screenshot quality

Project Member Reported by nepper@chromium.org, Jun 10 2016

Issue description

Currently, the tab switcher oftentimes uses low quality screenshots.

Repro:
- open a couple of tabs
- open the tab switcher
- look for one of the "older" tabs

Expected:
- great screenshot quality

Actual:
- compression artefacts

This has previously been a conscious implementation decision, see Issue 357740. We should re-evaluate our options to make sure we can improve the UX (this is pretty jarring) 
 

Comment 1 by aelias@chromium.org, Jun 22 2016

On which device?

Comment 2 by aelias@chromium.org, Jun 22 2016

Cc: aelias@chromium.org
Project Member

Comment 3 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Jul 6 2016

Labels: -M-53 M-54 MovedFrom-53
Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot

Comment 4 by nepper@chromium.org, Jul 19 2016

Hi,

this is visible on all devices and all Chrome on Android channels.

For comparison, please find attached screenshots from:
A: the Android recents view
B: Chrome on Android tab switcher with "the Independent" tab *not* being the last tab open
C: the same with the same tab being the last tab open

You can see that the quality of the Independent tab in B is considerably worse than in the other cases.

Comment 5 by bauerb@chromium.org, Jul 19 2016

My guess is in case B the tab image is not live from the renderer, but it's the screenshot saved on disk, which is lower quality.

Comment 6 by nepper@chromium.org, Jul 19 2016

Exactly, and I'd like to figure out how we can improve those. :)

Comment 7 by aelias@chromium.org, Jul 25 2016

OK, the screenshots looks like the expected ETC1 artifacting, not a bug.  Like Daniel, I'd suggest first trying out ETC2 on GLES3-supporting devices and see if the quality and performance is satisfactory.

Comment 8 by nepper@chromium.org, Aug 12 2016

Labels: -M-54 M-55
Let's try this out in the M55 time frame.
Labels: -M-55 M-56
Labels: -M-56 M-57 zine-triaged
Project Member

Comment 11 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, Nov 21 2017

Labels: Hotlist-Recharge-Cold
Status: Untriaged (was: Available)
This issue has been Available for over a year. If it's no longer important or seems unlikely to be fixed, please consider closing it out. If it is important, please re-triage the issue.

Sorry for the inconvenience if the bug really should have been left as Available. If you change it back, also remove the "Hotlist-Recharge-Cold" label.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Owner: cblume@chromium.org
+cblume, should this be marked as a duplicate of issue 748648 or  issue 794314 ?
All three of these issues seem like duplicates to me.

That said, I somehow completely missed issue 748648 being assigned to me back in Oct. This is the first I heard of this bug.

I can perhaps help with any png / etc1 / etc2 questions. But I know very very little about our tab switcher code. I touched it once and may have even introduced a bug when doing so. :) Probably best to reassign all these to someone on the Clank team.
I believe the three bugs are really about quality of the screenshot used in the tab switcher more-so than the tab switcher animation code.

Given the age of this bug, and inactivity thus far, if you're not the correct owner I think it's fine to move to P3/Available. Issue 748648 has the most context, so I'd de-dupe into that one as needed.
Labels: -Pri-2 Pri-3
Mergedinto: 748648
Owner: ----
Status: Duplicate (was: Untriaged)
In issue 748648 it seemed more like we were creating images of the wrong size. The problem went away once the images were created at the correct resolution. So I don't think it is about the quality of the image.
Oh whoops. I read what you said as "dupe into that one".
But while duping  issue 794314 , I saw your comment about NOT duping because issue 748648 is marked Restrict-View-Google.

Presumably, we could mark that as a dupe of one of these and just note that more details are available there?
I think it's okay to dupe against the RVG bug since everyone on this thread should have access. We can copy details back here if needed.

Sign in to add a comment