Hello David:

> I notice the 'Gamma' versions of these enlargers introduce haloing
> around some edges, while the non-gamma versions do not (or it's too
> little to see). A naive conversion may be the cause of this
> difference. If you could utilize the profile attached to the image,
> and generate or load a linear one, you could use LittleCMS to do the
> conversion in an assuredly correct way.

The main weaknesses of "our" methods are:

--haloing (but they have less haloing than Lanczos)

--aliasing (but IBFNBQH shows less, although still more than Lanczos, which is 
more blurry)

--memory usage (an temporary int16 "copy" of the input image has to be created)

Although I have hunches, I still do not understand perfectly how icc profiles 
affect enlargement artifacts. (This being said, a monotone method, like nearest 
neighbour, bilinear or non-interpolatory B-splines, should
not be affected much by gamma obliviousness; bicubic, Lanczos, EANBQH and 
IBFNBQH are NOT monotone.) 

This is something I'll have to experiment with.

Thank you for your comments,

Nicolas Robidoux

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to