Request for @Bubble team: Can you add the ability to specify facepad on Imgix? Right now when you check the “Auto crop around the face” box in Bubble it zooms in really tight on the face area (presumably because it uses the default facepad=1.0). By enabling developers to specify facepad (as a number between 1 and 10), it would give us a lot more control over how images appear. It’s a small thing, but could make a big difference in the visual appeal of a site. I know it would really help with the product I’m working on right now.
Or, maybe even enable us to add our own parameters to :processed with imgix ? Imgix has some amazing functionality and it would be absolutely awesome if we could make full use of that!
This is a great idea! I don’t use the facepad feature because it crops uncomfortably close on the photos I tried. But, I had no idea there were options.
Though I COMPLETELY understand the need for feature discipline that comes with scaling, I do miss the days when @Bubble would just add stuff within hours of people casually asking for it on the forums!
Sorry to bump my own thread, but would really love to see the above Imgix facepad suggestion implemented. You already expose a number of Imgix variables … is this one that could be added easily? The current image auto-crop (set to facepad=1.0) just cuts too too too close to people’s faces—often cutting off chins and foreheads!
It is in @Bubble’s best interests to have us build not just functional but beautiful apps that can be shown off with pride — I’m trying to do that, and this is one of those small “design things” that would help.
Thanks for acknowledging this, @eve. I’m hoping it’s one of those “It’s Friday afternoon and I just finished my sprint early; let’s see what else I can squeeze in” kind of things. -Ed
That would be ideal, but I don’t know if that creates other complications (e.g., conflict between a variable selected from the existing :processed with imgix interface and any parameter inputted through something like this), and the facepad param is the top priority for me personally, so I’d rather just see that sneak in quickly and then have Bubble implement a more holistic solution later.
Yeah, Imgix has some awesome functionality, and I think Imgix is one of the least understood and least appreciated features of the Bubble platform. It provides great value.
Unfortunately, I was informed by Bubble support recently that Bubble will likely be abandoning Imgix, so I’ve been reluctant to rely heavily on it, which is a shame, as I was really planning to make good use of it in my current project. That’s also why I’m a bit puzzled that @eve said she’d run your request by the dev team.
We’re currently evaluating the value of having Imgix versus other image processing mechanisms, and part of that evaluation should be customer feedback on how frequently the feature is used. Requests for new functions of a feature to our team do signify that the feature is a valuable one to our community, so it is important for us to log these requests, especially for a feature that we are considering phasing out.
Yes, but that approach assumes users are already aware of how Imgix is currently used as well as the BOATLOAD of functionality it contains that’s not currently exposed through the Bubble platform.
My sense (based upon forum posts) is that most Bubble users aren’t even aware that it’s used behind the scenes to automatically optimize uploaded images. Instead, it’s assumed that images are served from Amazon S3, which they aren’t. The S3 version is simply the “master” image from which context-optimized variants are auto-generated “on the fly” and hosted on / served from Imgix’s wicked fast CDN (which yields a significant performance boost - especially on mobile). In short, I think most Bubblers are unaware of the value Imgix provides - especially for image-heavy apps.
I was considering writing a plug-in to leverage some of Imgix’s un-utilized capabilities and to increase its “visibility” to Bubble users but was told by Bubble that I couldn’t do so using Bubble’s built-in support for it. Instead, I was told I should require users to enter their own key for their own Imgix account.
That didn’t make sense to me because I saw the plug-in as an opportunity to “raise awareness” of some of the value provided by the Bubble platform.
Just chiming in here as well. Imgix needs to be overhauled with more functionality. It’s far too basic for most users dealing with advanced image needs.
Any news about imgix & images transformation capabilities?
My use case is the following : I do need my user to be able to upload images, and add transformation such as overlays, texts, and so on. For social media purpose.
I was able to reach my need using Adalo, playing with the image url parameters. I’d need the same feature or let’s say, possibility, on Bubble side.
Many thanks for your feedback!
Also, if imgix is going to be discontinued, could you please let us know?
