On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 16:34:28 +0200, Geert Jordaens
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Gowers wrote:
>> On 6/23/07, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 13:26 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> I think "nearest neighbour" is non technical, very obvious in it's
>>>> and readily understood.
>>> IMO it is very technical and the vast majority of users does not
>>> understand its meaning. They also don't understand Linear or Cubic for
>>> that matter, but it's difficult to come up with simpler terms.
>> Well, we could consider naming it in a slightly longer way but one
>> that may be more suggestive to the ordinary user ---
>> 1-factor (nearest neighbour)
>> 2-factor (linear)
>> 3-factor (cubic)
>> 5-factor (lanczos3) -- is this number correct?
>> So it would be a fairly simple and common pattern to see -- more
>> factors taken into consideration -> more quality, more time.
>> Gimp-developer mailing list
> Couldn't we suggest in there naming what is the most appropriate filter
> for a certain image type.
> linear => line-art (low)
> nearest neighbour => line-art (medium)
> cubic => photo(high/medium)
> lanczos => photo(high)
OK, looks like we get a pre-discussion now, although be warned
implementation has been put off to >2.4
Sven , I can understand someone without a knowlege of maths not
understanding what linear and cubic refer to , they'll have to
suck-and-see or read the doc. but anyone capable walking to the shop for a
loaf of bread ought to be able to work out what nearest nieghbour means
and have a fairly good guess as to what it means in pixels.
David , yes lanczos3 is pretty sure to be the most suitable option. The
code is now general enought to swap to lanczos4 with c/3/4/ in one const
definition but it's not so good a v. slow.
Geert, linear is way better than N.N. you need to swap that around.
I'd like to see some extra info available like a tool tip but I dont think
the currect dropdown list object has that behaviour. Could be wrong tho'.
I think this whole subject needs going into thoroughly especially w.r.t.
downscaling where decimation is used in place of interp. It would be good
for Peter to come in and cast his expert eye on whether this could better
be presented in different way in the UI.
But as this will not be a trivial discussion the descission was to put all
this off 'till later and probably tackle it as part of GEGL integration.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Gimp-developer mailing list