If you want an image field to be displayed at 100% in a layout, the size of the container must be at least 2 pixels larger than the actual size of the image.

I discovered this when I changed a graphic in one of my layouts from being embedded (i.e., pasted into the layout) to being in a container field. I replaced the embedded 24 x 24 graphic with a container of the same size. When I noticed the graphic didn't look exactly the same, a little investigation revealed that the containter was scaling the graphic to 22 x 22.

My experimenting so far has been limited to FM 8 on Tiger.

-- Ward

The extra pixel is for the border which is part of every field. The default border is invisible and 1px.

I had to learn this one the hard way too ???

CyborgSam's comment encouraged me to experiment a bit more with container sizing. I now have a 24 x 24 image displayed in a same-sized container. The trick is unintuitive, at least to me.

My original 24 x 24 container that scaled the image to 22 x 22 has these Field Border properties:

Top, Left, Bottom, Right - all unchecked

Borders format - None

This says to me, "The container has no borders, and the border width is zero."

My new container that doesn't scale the image:

Top, Left, Bottom, Right - all checked

Borders format - None

This says to me, "The contains HAS borders, but the border with is zero."

I now realize the Top, Left, Bottom, Right options actually control whether a border is visible, not whether the border exists. It seems to me that distinction should not be relevant when the border width is zero.

There's an interesting side-effect of the new same-sized container - the field boundaries no longer appear in Layout mode. So the container says "image" or looks like a pasted graphic, depending on the state of View > Show > Sample Data.

-- Ward

P.S. Perhaps the title of this thread should be changed to "How many zero-width borders can dance on the head of a pin?"

Hooray! It is fixed in 8. If you open the same file in 7 however you'll see that your container's image has been reduced (or chopped off in my case, as I set these small containers to Crop). It is really a bug introduced in 7.

Normally 2 extra pixels isn't critical, unless you're trying to fit an icon button in a line or portal row.

Thank you very much, this was just the information I was looking for. Does this also mean I can retain my background highlights that cover entire list lines without a top border gap when upgrading from 6 to 8?

Edited December 20, 200520 yr by Guest