Awesome! Thanks. :) It will be great to get a decent result from cubic
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Øyvind Kolås <pip...@gimp.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:03 AM, C R <caj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I assume the reasoning behind using cubic as the default for all the
> > and transform tools is to cut back on the complaints of how slow GIMP is
> > the moment, but the quality loss in the current cubic interpolation
> > algorithm is quite bad.
> > Can we shift the default to No Halo or Lo Halo?
> > Also, it's probably safe to assume that if the user chooses an
> > interpolation type in the tool, they are saying something about the
> > of the results they are after vs speed. I think setting the value in one
> > tool should set the value automatically in other tools, and treat it as a
> > "global" value of sorts.
> I've pushed code to GEGL master that makes the resamplers called
> "linear" and "cubic" do a tiny bit more than just interpolation. These
> operations now do a (possibly sparse) box-filtering when scaling down
> instead of scaling up. Doing point sampling with interpolated values
> is probably not what a user expect "cubic" or "linear" scaling down to
> be anyways,. even if this is what it currently is. GEGL now does a 2x2
> averaging of values for bilinear and a 4x4 sparse box filter averaging
> for cubic. Due to how this code uses whole pixels for averaging it
> might yield slightly sharper result than nohalo in many cases.
gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address: firstname.lastname@example.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list