Is there a reason the selection of sizes is so limited? As an example, the game icons uploaded to Roblox can be 1080x1080 for Xbox, but the API only shows 50x50 and 150x150. Also, the sizes are very inconsistent, like Avatar being the only one with 352x352 and AvatarHeadShot being the only ones with 48x48 and 60x60?
I think the max size for GameIcons is 1024x1024. We plan on adding sizes 512x512, 256x256 and 128x128 for GameIcons. The sizes are mostly picked based on sizes we want to use internally and the most common size currently in use. If we allowed many more sizes the chances that a requested size was not already generated would be increased.
This is so much better/more concise than the ones we had to use previously, thank you!
Why the order of parameters is enforced for rbxthumb?
The first of the two options below is much easier to write:
I agree - I don’t see any reason to enforce the order of parameters.
Will old endpoints be deprecated anytime soon? A lot of older content I have relies on those.
Also this seems like a much better and more uniform system so I look forward to using it more soon
These are some of the endpoints I’m talking about:
Will avatar busts be supported?
rbxthumb:// is translated to what url wise? We’re given the urls for rbxassetid:// and others on the wiki, how about this one?
The ones on the website are served from something like tr.rbxcdn.com with a hashed path so it’s probably not a very friendly URL. Best to stick with the rbxthumb one.
You can find the web versions by using the API, https://thumbnails.roblox.com/v1/users/avatar-headshot?userIds=1&size=48x48&format=png so I imagine it’s similar. Although the URL probably changes every time you update your avatar so it’s not very useful to know the exact URL.
Yeah I’m wondering if they change the base url off the params or whether or not its a new endpoint that fits all. This is important for external web stuff!
It uses the new batch thumbnail endpoint. You can see the documentation of this endpoint here: https://thumbnails.roblox.com/docs#!/Batch/post_v1_batch
Will it ever be possible in the foreseeable future to generate/render our own size for our own individual needs just by inputting a custom width and length?
I’d like to use more power to number of 2 formats such as 32,64,128,256 especially in the context of avatar related images for a more flexible scaling system. I can easily think of some use cases where a 16x16 image would be used in a chat for example. A 64x64 image in a leader-board and a 128/256 image in a flexible player stat system.
Not to mention, I’ve always been strongly instructed to use power numbers wherever possible in textures/images due to the reasoning below and I’ve always heavily agreed with the reasoning that power of 2 based images improve performance in general. I previously did some simple 2D based sprite designs for an old indie game studio they loaded considerably quicker than some wild number such as 66x63 that was being used previously.
Will the :GetUserThumbnailAsync API be deprecated? What is the preferred API now? This, or that?
This is the prefered API as it batches thumbnail requests together so it is more efficient. We have no plans to deprecate :GetUserThumbnailAsync right now. If you want to check if a thumbnail is ready or not, using RbxThumb right now may be slightly more complicated than :GetUserThumbnailAsync as you would need to use ContentProvider:PreloadAsync with the callback function parameter.
I’m really hoping this is either intentional or hard to fix, because I don’t want to waste my time writing
string.format every time I use static
rbxthumb:// urls with a variable ID, and then have to comb through and remove them all if they update it @.@
We have decided to change rbxthumb to no longer require a specific order of parameters. This should be released in around 2 weeks.
We have released sizes sizes 128x128, 256x256 and 512x512 for GameIcons.
Any word yet on the parameter ordering?
What does the
"Asset" thumbnail ID represent? Catalog/library thumbnails or something else? At first I was guessing regular decal image IDs but now I doubt that.
Will there eventually be a way to load developer product thumbnails with the ContentId format?