On 11-07-09 03:47, Nicolas Robidoux wrote:
Let me try to explain the motivation for having different methods for
transformations which are tuned for upsampling on the one hand, and
downsampling on the other, and why a one size fits all stylishly
scheme is neither easy to put together nor
On 10-07-09 16:39, Nicolas Robidoux wrote:
Most likely names of the resamplers at this point are either:
upsharp and upsmooth
or
sharpupsize and smoothupsize
for the samplers tuned for warps in which upsampling is more typical
than downsampling (e.g., for image enlargement), and either
Suggestion implementing the s/nohalo family and the nohalobox family
without an explicit, visible, parameter:
Would it be possible/desirable to use the current code (which has a
parameter) as some sort of template?
Then, the nohalobox code would produce four independent samplers:
sharperbox -
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Nicolas
Robidouxnrobid...@cs.laurentian.ca wrote:
Suggestion implementing the s/nohalo family and the nohalobox family
without an explicit, visible, parameter:
Would it be possible/desirable to use the current code (which has a
parameter) as some sort of
hi,
Nicolas Robidoux schrieb:
Can you (yes, I mean you) think of better names?
uh, what, me?
i wouldn't want to be bothered with choosing different samplers
for up/down-scaling.
So just let me choose from matching pairs of samplers.
You know them better than i do...
greetings,
peter
yahvuu writes:
uh, what, me?
i wouldn't want to be bothered with choosing different samplers
for up/down-scaling.
(I'm surprised. You are always happy with the thumbnails you get?
Result after rotating an image? Maybe I'm too invested in this field
to know what matters and what
sharpEnlarge and smoothEnlarge
and
sharpShrink and smoothShrink (or sharpReduce and smoothReduce)
?
PS
Let me know if you'd rather I think about all this off list.
___
Gegl-developer mailing list
Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
sharpsmall and smoothsmall
and
sharpbig and smoothbig
?
In a scale image menu, the most likely appropriate method could be
chosen automatically (depending on the requested resizing), with an
extra smoothing toggle set by default to off.
Nicolas Robidoux
Universite Laurentienne
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Nicolas
Robidouxnrobid...@cs.laurentian.ca wrote:
PS
Let me know if you'd rather I think about all this off list.
I dislike writing email, and you are almost using email like IRC, feel
free to continue but do not expect much response from me in particular
:d
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Nicolas
Robidouxnrobid...@cs.laurentian.ca wrote:
Adam Turcotte and Eric Daoust are implementing samplers (alternatives
to nearest neighbour, bilinear, bicubic, lanczos... interpolation),
names snohalo1 (tuned for upsampling) and nohalobox (tuned for
Nicolas Robidoux writes:
For example, nohalo1 (same result as snohalo1 with smoothing = 0, but
runs faster) would be sharper, snohalo1 with smoothing = 1 would be
smoother, and snohalo1 with smoothing = .5 would be halfandhalf,
or something kind of like that?
If there were only four
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Øyvind Kolåsislew...@gmail.com wrote:
I would feel more comfortable if this parameter was not exposed, but
rather that sane presets were added and given names. In most cases the
additional properties of for instance a displacement map operation
might be visual
12 matches
Mail list logo
