On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:29:08PM -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I could get a good image, but not to the satisfaction of the customer. It
> appeared to be the way in which imagemagick scales the image as opposed to
Do you have an example image? Really, either you hit a bug in imagemagick
itself, or you are simply doing sth. wrong. ImageMagick can use exactly
the same algorithm as gimp.
> gimp. Gimp seems to handle it better. I would think it would be pretty much a
> wash but based on what i have coded up so far....it's not the case. At least
> not for the client who is really really picky about the pixelation.
What, exactly, were you doing (state the command line) with imagemagick?
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
