JSplitPane and divider size.

I have a JSplitPane with a panel on the left, a panel on the right and a panel in the middle as the divider. When the user clicks on the divider and drags and drops it to a new location, this divider appears as a black area the size of the middle divider panel. This is using one touch layout....my middle divider panel is about 120 pixels wide and when the user is dragging and dropping this divider, I want it to appear as a thin black line (about 4 pixels wide).
I have not been able to reset the divider size on a mouse pressed event in my divider panel...I thought this might do it, but it does not. any ideas?

http://www.physci.org/codes/sscce.jsp

Similar Messages

  • Getting file header size and image size

    Hi all,
    Now that the AVI file type won't work for me, I have to do some of that functionality myself.
    I can use the function to Get File Size, and the size is returned in bytes, so far so good.
    I figured I could calculate the image size by taking the resolution, multiply X and Y, that gives me the number of pixels.
    Then multiply pixels by bit depth, to get the number of bits, divide by 8 for the number of bytes.
    Since bit depth is 8, the number of bytes will be exact (and the same as the number of pixels).
    When I did the math, and divided by the file size, it didn't come to a round number, and was a larger number than the number of images I could display.
    I figured there is probably additional information stored with each image, but I don't know how to adjust for that.
    There may be byte clustering happening, making each image larger than the actual byte count would indicate.
    And, there is probably file header info, but not sure where to get that.
    I looked through the IMAQ functions, and didn't see one about getting the image size (I did see the one that returns resolution, but I have that data already).
    Any suggestions on how I can calculate how many images are in my binary file?
    And, how to get the byte sizes I need to be able to set the file pointer correctly to get an image out of the middle of the file?
    Thank you for any suggestions,
    Jeff

    If I understand correctly You have binary file with multiple images inside and You want to extract that images?
    Depending on image type You can search by tags where image begins and ends: http://www.impulseadventure.com/photo/jpeg-decoder.html and extract.

  • Filename and path sizes and characters

    I am failing to load 4000+ tracks to my Ipod from my XP machine using Itunes 7.50.0.20. This is an Ipod Clickwheel 20GB. I want to load 17.86GB in the now empty Ipod. However it gets so far then stops saying there is not enough space.
    I wonder if am I getting the wrong message?
    Some of my tracks have very long filenames/paths e.g 124 charactere filenames and 213 character paths. I also have some filenames with " (double quote) in.
    Could this be the reason?
    If so what characters must I avoid and what size should the filename and paths be limited to?

    Filenames and paths are irrelevant. They are renamed on the iPod anyway.
    20 GB is not really 20. It is a rounded number all HD manufacturers use. Plus you lose some space due to formatting and the iPod software. There is also meta data for the songs which takes some space.

  • Photoshop CC 2014 UI Menu Text And Icon Size?

    so i really like that adobe has added the "experimental" option to increase the ui menu text and icon size in photoshop cc 2014, it was almost unreadable on my 2560 x 1440 27" monitor with photoshop cs4 and illustrator cs4, but the lone 200% setting is too big... seems that 125%, 150%, or maybe even 175% would be much better solutions. in fact, for reasons i can't quite understand, the ui text and icon size in illustrator cc 2014 is spot on, absolutely perfect on my monitor, even tho there is no option for increased ui size as far as i can tell, it was spot on the moment i installed and launched it.
    in short, the photoshop cs4 and illustrator cs4 user interfaces were identical in size as far as i could tell, and far too small on my 2560 x 1440 27" monitor. in terms of cc 2014, the illustrator ui is perfect out of the box on my monitor, considerably larger than illustrator cs4, while the photoshop cc 2014 ui is identical to cs4, tiny, but can be enlarged 200% which makes the ui too big. why couldn't/didn't adobe just make the photoshop cc 2014 base ui the exact same size as the illustrator cc 2014 ui? it would have been perfect (for my monitor size).

    thanks... just wish illustrator cc 2014 wasn't so perfect in terms of ui size, i mean it's just great and, consequently, makes it seem as if the ball was dropped with photoshop cc 2014... i mean how can one be spot on while the other be so far off?

  • How to change DEFAULT font and font size on new Pages document

    When I open a new Page document, it always comes in with a default font and font size. I know how to change those settings on the open document.
    I want to know how to change the ~default~ font and font size so that a new Page document always opens with those default settings.
    -Thanks for your service to the community.

    Hi Lionate
    Welcome to the forum.
    Make a document to your liking.
    Change the Body style and any other styles in :
    +Menu > Show Styles Drawer > click on the little triangle next to Body > redefine Style from Selection+
    Capture the page:
    +Menu > Format > Advanced > Capture Pages… > Name it > OK+
    +Menu > Format > Advanced > Manage Pages… > Delete other Sections/Pages > OK+
    Save as a template:
    +Menu > File > Save as Template…+
    +Menu > Pages > Preferences > General Preferences > For New Documents > click Use template: > Choose > browse to the template above+
    Peter

  • Drag and Drop and Image Size

    I need to be able to drag and drop images but I need them to be a certain size when I drag them out of an Aperture project. For various reasons, I don't want to use the export function. Only drag and drop will be efficient for the workflow that I"m planning. Problem is, the pixel dimension is not wide enough when I test it by pulling an image on to the desktop.
    My ultimate goal is drag them, sized and ready to go, and drop them onto a web browser upload page. I don't want to fumble with the extra steps of exporting them to another folder on the desktop and then upload the images from that folder to the browser.
    So does anybody know how or if it's possible to control the drag and drop SIZE /DIMENSION of an image?

    The drag and drop size is determined by your preview settings. What actually gets "dragged & dropped" is the preview, not the master file. You can control the quality and size of the preview in the Aperture preferences.

  • I have many photos with file extension of .PDD and that Photo Deluxe 4 no longer will operate in Win 7. How can I open?  Next in Elements 11, how do I load and print different pictures and different sizes options on the same page?

    I have many photos with file extension of .PDD and that Photo Deluxe 4 no longer will operate in Win 7. How can I open?  Next in Elements 11, how do I load and print different pictures and different sizes options on the same page?
    Thanks,
    Shir

    sbmgrams wrote:
    I have many photos with file extension of .PDD and that Photo Deluxe 4 no longer will operate in Win 7. How can I open?
    See here:
    Reading PhotoDeluxe PDD Files

  • I just updated my iTunes and I do not like the newer version.....can I go back to the earlier version??  This new version does not have the iTunes DJ nor does is show at the bottom as in the earlier version how many songs and the size of my library.

    I just updated my iTunes on 12-7-2012 and I do not like the newer version.....can I go back to the earlier version??  This new version does not have the iTunes DJ nor does is show at the bottom as in the earlier version how many songs and the size of my library.

    To do this in iMovie 11. use the SHARE menu. Share your project using the Share menu and choose Export Using QuickTime.
    In the Dialog box that comes up, choose Sound to AIFF, or one of the other sound options. This will create a file that you can drag into iTubes.

  • I am using your software: CS^ InDesign Suite on a PC using a Windows 7 operating system.     Due to eyesight issues, I need to have the menu bars of programs in easy-to-read font and picture size.  Specifically, the menu bar

    Hi,
    I am using your software: CS6 InDesign Suiteon a PC using a Windows 7 operating system.
    Due to eyesight issues, I need to have the menu bars of programs in easy-to-read font and picture size.  Specifically, the menu bar across the top (File, Edit, View, etc.), and the menu bar on the left side with the graphic depiction of options.
    In earlier versions of Windows (e.g. XP), whenever I changed the screen resolution on my computer to a lesser resolution in order to show the link icons on my desktop in a larger, more readable size, all the software programs, including yours, appeared on my screen with the menu bars in the larger font size that I needed.
    However, in Windows 7, this is not the case.  Even though I have selected the lowest resolution, making the icons on my desktop extremely large, I cannot read the options across the top menu bar of your program, nor the pull-down menu items that they contain.  I cannot see the graphic depictions of options on the left side of the screen. They are all too small.  How can I make your program increase the size?

    CS6 is not high-DPI compatible/ enabled and that can't be changed. If you cannot6 make it work with your operating system means, then short of joining Creative Cloud and using newer versions there is nothing you can do.
    Mylenium

  • I am using CS6 InDesign suite on a PC using a Windows 7 operating system.     Due to eyesight issues, I need to have the menu bars of programs in easy-to-read font and picture size.  Specifically, the menu bar across the top (File, Edit, View, etc.), and

    I am using CS6 InDesign on a PC using a Windows 7 operating system.
    Due to eyesight issues, I need to have the menu bars of programs in easy-to-read font and picture size.  Specifically, the menu bar across the top (File, Edit, View, etc.), and the menu bar on the left side with the graphic depiction of options.
    In earlier versions of Windows (e.g. XP), whenever I changed the screen resolution on my computer to a lesser resolution in order to show the link icons on my desktop in a larger, more readable size, all the software programs, including yours, appeared on my screen with the menu bars in the larger font size that I needed.
    However, in Windows 7, this is not the case.  Even though I have selected the lowest resolution, making the icons on my desktop extremely large, I cannot read the options across the top menu bar of your program, nor the pull-down menu items that they contain.  I cannot see the graphic depictions of options on the left side of the screen. They are all too small.  How can I make your program increase the size?

    NO way.
    Mylenium

  • How do I change the font and graphic size when using Firefox

    I have recently switched from Windows to Mac. When resizing the window in Mac the font and graphic size do not follow -- they stay the same size and only more "white space" is created by increasing the window size. How do I get the graphics and fonts to adapt to the new window size or at least make the whole image bigger. I am using Firefox 3.6.12 and Mac OS10.6.5. Thanks for the help.

    You can select to zoom the full page or only the text: View > Zoom > Zoom Text Only<br />
    Firefox 3 can remember the zoom level site specific.
    See:
    * http://kb.mozillazine.org/Zoom_text_of_web_pages
    * http://kb.mozillazine.org/browser.zoom.siteSpecific
    * http://kb.mozillazine.org/browser.zoom.full

  • Tablespaces and block size in Data Warehouse

    We are preparing to implement Data Warehouse on Oracle 11g R2 and currently I am trying to set up some storage strategy - unfortunately I have very little experience with that. The question is what are general advices in such considerations according table spaces and block size? I made some research and it is hard to find some clear answer, there are resources advising that block size is not important and can be left small (8 KB), others state that it is crucial and should be the biggest possible (64KB). The other thing is what part of data should be placed where? Many resources state that keeping indexes apart from its data is a myth and a bad practice as it may lead to decrease of performance, others say that although there is no performance benefit, index table spaces do not need to be backed up and thats why it should be split. The next idea is to have separate table spaces for big tables, small tables, tables accessed frequently and infrequently. How should I organize partitions in terms of table spaces? Is it a good idea to have "old" data (read only) partitions on separate table spaces?
    Any help highly appreciated and thank you in advance.

    Wojtus-J wrote:
    We are preparing to implement Data Warehouse on Oracle 11g R2 and currently I am trying to set up some storage strategy - unfortunately I have very little experience with that. With little experience, the key feature is to avoid big mistakes - don't try to get too clever.
    The question is what are general advices in such considerations according table spaces and block size? If you need to ask about block sizes, use the default (i.e. 8KB).
    I made some research and it is hard to find some clear answer, But if you get contradictory advice from this forum, how would you decide which bits to follow ?
    A couple of sensible guidelines when researching on the internet - look for material that is datestamped with recent dates (last couple of years), or references recent - or at least relevant - versions of Oracle. Give preference to material that explains WHY an idea might be relevant, give greater preference to material that DEMONSTRATES why an idea might be relevant. Check that any explanations and demonstrations are relevant to your planned setup.
    The other thing is what part of data should be placed where? Many resources state that keeping indexes apart from its data is a myth and a bad practice as it may lead to decrease of performance, others say that although there is no performance benefit, index table spaces do not need to be backed up and thats why it should be split. The next idea is to have separate table spaces for big tables, small tables, tables accessed frequently and infrequently. How should I organize partitions in terms of table spaces? Is it a good idea to have "old" data (read only) partitions on separate table spaces?
    It is often convenient, and sometimes very important, to separate data into different tablespaces based on some aspect of functionality. The performance thing was mooted (badly) in an era when discs were small and (disk) partitions were hard; but all your other examples of why to split are potentially valid for administrative. Big/Small, table/index, old/new, read-only/read-write, fact/dimension etc.
    For data warehouses a fairly common practice is to identify some sort of aging pattern for the data, and try to pick a boundary that allows you to partition data so that a large fraction of the data can eventually be made read-only: using tablespaces to mark time-boundaries can be a great convenience - note that the tablespace boundary need not match the partition boudary - e.g. daily partitions in a monthly tablespace. If you take this type of approach, you might have a "working" tablespace for recent data, and then copy the older data to "time-specific" tablespace, packing it and making it readonly as you do so.
    Tablespaces are (broadly speaking) about strategy, not performance. (Temporary tablespaces / tablespace groups are probably the exception to this thought.)
    Regards
    Jonathan Lewis

  • What is the best Practice to improve MDIS performance in setting up file aggregation and chunk size

    Hello Experts,
    in our project we have planned to do some parameter change to improve the MDIS performance and want to know the best practice in setting up file aggregation and chunk size when we importing large numbers of small files(one file contains one record and each file size would be 2 to 3KB) through automatic import process,
    below is the current setting in production:-
    Chunk Size=2000
    No. Of Chunks Processed In Parallel=40
    file aggregation-5
    Records Per Minute processed-37
    and we made the below setting in Development system:-
    Chunk Size=70000
    No. Of Chunks Processed In Parallel=40
    file aggregation-25
    Records Per Minute processed-111
    after making the above changes import process improved but we want to get expert opinion making these changes in production because there is huge number different between what is there in prod and what change we made in Dev.
    thanks in advance,
    Regards
    Ajay

    Hi Ajay,
    The SAP default values are as below
    Chunk Size=50000
    No of Chunks processed in parallel = 5
    File aggregation: Depends  largely on the data , if you have one or 2 records being sent at a time then it is better to cluster them together and send it at one shot , instead of sending the one record at a time.
    Records per minute Processed - Same as above
    Regards,
    Vag Vignesh Shenoy

  • TS3195 I can upload photos and smaller size videos but when a video is 24 minutes long for instance, it doesn't upload at all from my iPhone to the PC. How do I upload these videos that are longer in length?

    I can upload photos and smaller size videos but when a video is 24 minutes long for instance, it doesn't upload at all from my iPhone to the PC. How do I upload these videos that are longer in length?

    Are you using any software to import videos? Did you tried Picasa or you just open your iPhone from My Computer?

  • Raid storage usage and block size

    We have two XServe RAID units Raid 5 and we are adding a new 16 bay ACNC raid with 16 1.5TB drives in Raid 6 + Hot Spare. I initialized the Raid 6 with 128K block size. The total data moving from the older raid volumes is around 5.7TB, but on the new Raid it is taking around 7.4TB of space. Is this due to the 128K block size? This is a prepress server so most of the files are quite large, but there may be lots of small files as well.

    Hi
    RAID 0 does indeed offer best performance, however if any one drive of the striped set fails you will lose all your data. If you have not considered a backup strategy now would be the time to do so. For redundancy RAID 1 Mirror might be a better option as this will offer a safety net in case of a single drive failure. A RAID is not a backup and you should always consider a workable backup strategy.
    Purchase another 2x1TB drives and you could consider a RAID 10? Two Stripes mirrored.
    Not all your files will be large ones as I'm guessing you'll be using this workstation for the usual mundane matters such as email etc? Selecting a larger block size with small file sizes usually decreases performance. You have to consider all applications and file sizes, in which case the best block size would be 32k.
    My 2p
    Tony

Maybe you are looking for