On 4/12/06, Leeuw van der, Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Steven, > > Sorry that my reply is getting a bit messy but outlook on windows isn't > very well in quoting text...
never mind and i thank you! > > To get the latest version depends on your distribution. You can get the > source tarball and compile, fetching any updated dependancies yourself. > But a distribution like Debian is likely to have packages already built > and available as part of 'unstable'. ok, i know how to do you. > Btw, since your images are scanned from film, perhaps they are already > somewhat noisy? yes, i found scanned images are usually noisy than digitial camera's. it is actually a pain for me. what's the best way of handling the case? > Did you try to reduce noise, or perhaps increase > sharpness / reduce blur / etc, before scaling the image? > Just a thought - but it seems to me that (down)scaling a noisy image > will give worse results than downscaling a cleaner image. i do the noise reducing using despeckle filter. but it was adviced in many other articles that tools like despeckle will also introduce blurring ( i found it's really true ) and should be down in the very final step, especially after downscaling or upscaling. so, i think i have some problem to get your point here. did you really suggest i do the despeckle or some unsharp mask things before downscaling ? > Another option would be to try scaling the images with imagemagick. It > might already have lanczos scaling and other scaling options built-in > with the version installed (or installable as pre-built package) with > your distribution. You can even write a small shell-script to scale all > images in some directory, if that's your thing. supposing my Gimp has already equiped a Lanczos interpolation, when comparing to imagemagic in scaling, which one performs better in term of quality? thanks. -- woody _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
