David Gowers wrote:
> Perhaps you mean supersampling?
Yes, it must be. I'm using a spanish localization of Gimp and try to 
guess the correct translation.
Is there a command line option to launch gimp in english (just once, not 
permanent) so I can use the correct words when I'm reporting a bug or 
discussing something like this?
> For now, you should rotate before scaling down if possible.
Yes, I try to do it. But it isn't always possible.
Most of the times you have to make minor adjustments, and that 
progressively destroys image data.
The opaque copy of the original tends to make the process of tweaking 
longer, because you can't see the context.
Making the original image semi-transparent would be a great help.

> Presently, the solution to this is to scale down incrementally (reduce
> scale by 50% until you approach the desired scale, and then scale down
> to that exact size.)
Nice tip. I'll try it.
It's not that comfortable but at least is a workaround.
> Maybe GIMP could implement the above workaround before 2.4. It would
> be inefficient (scaling down the image N times instead of once) but it
> would mean that the result was correctly dependant on ALL the source
> pixels.
Yes, this sounds interesting. I'd prefer a little slower transformation 
if the image quality isn't so compromised.

> Non-destructive transformation is something that would be more
> sensible to implement after 2.4.
Yes, sure. Non-destructive transformation with GEGL will be great. But 
it won't be here inmediately, and it would be great to have 
not-so-destructive transformations while we wait.
Thanks for your reply, David.
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to