Op 17-mei-2006, om 16:05 heeft Kenneth Wimer het volgende geschreven:
On May 17, 2006, at 3:08 PM, Michiel Sikma wrote:
Op 17-mei-2006, om 14:49 heeft Kenneth Wimer het volgende geschreven:
On May 17, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Michiel Sikma wrote:
Op 17-mei-2006, om 12:52 heeft Kenneth Wimer het volgende
geschreven:
The problems I see with this whole thing is this:
A pic, when rendered from vector with a decent editor, anti-
aliases differently at different sizes. Every time the thing is
scaled you loose quality (unless you are just really, really
lucky). So, making bigger pics is easy but they are only
loosely related to other versions of the same pic (when it
comes to the anti-aliasing) and therefor not the best
determiner as to the quality of anti-aliasing.
That said, I'll still make bigger versions of my pics...but
let's not decide based on the bigger versions, but on the
smaller versions :-)
Bye,
Ken
As for the losing of quality: when you downscale any raster
image, you will lose information. That's true. However, since a
downscaled image is smaller than the original, you won't
actually SEE that you lose information. You will only see this
if you UPscale an image.
True. But, what we are aiming for here is knowing exactly which
pic has the best anti-aliasing, so any change in the information
in the images between versions leads us to make a decision based
on at least partially incorrect or unknown information.
Not if a sufficiently decent artist made it.
Not true. A decent artist could touch up every version to make it
nice, but simply scaling any pic and expecting the anti-aliasing to
look good is not enough, no matter how well the original pic looks
at the size intended or how well it is made.
This _is_ true if you simply scale the pic from the full-colored
version. Of course, it's imperative that the artist does NOT scale an
already indexed color image!
I managed to get the color dithering and anti-aliasing just right
for my entries. I can do it again for downscaled entries just as
easily. I think this shouldn't be a problem for the other artists
as well.
This will work - but not always...it depends on the pic itself and
how the lines, angles, curves and colors are anti-aliased at a
given size. In the end, the result might be "good enough" but this
is not a rule one can write in stone. If it works for you, great.
If it works for others, great. But let's not explain things this
way only.
I don't see the problem. Just scale the picture from the full-color
version and fix the anti-aliasing like you normally would. Any kind
of problems that one would run in, would also be ran into when making
whatever version you've already uploaded.
Also, I think that we should separate the cases of pre-scaling
the pics to the correct aspect ratio and scaling them up as Mark
asked in another mail. Perhaps this is leading to confusion.
So if you don't have normal-sized versions of your splash
screen, then that's okay; just don't post upscaled versions.
That's not necessary.
If I understood Mark correctly, he would like a bigger version of
the pic, in which the anti-aliasing can be seen at a larger size.
I misunderstood this at first and assumed I would have to export
larger versions but after a coffee and 5min thinking, I realized
that this is the incorrect way to do this. In order to show the
actual pics anti-aliasing at a larger size, I simply scaled the
entire image with the Gimp and set the interpolation to "none". I
think that I am on the right track here (see the attached pics).
Doesn't Opera support the scaling of pictures? You could just view
the page with that.
I don't use Opera :-) I did finally find out how to turn off the
stupid smoothing using gwenview though.
However, let's NOT necessarily decide on the smaller versions;
all my images are normal-sized versions that need to be
downscaled before they're used in any binary, and I don't think
we should downscale them for the sake of comparison.
I think that the artistic merits of the design itself should be
decided upon as one will view it in real life (not scaled) but
the technical issues as to how well the thing will actually look
when in use definitely need to be considered as well. Of course,
one oculd argue that unless we make screenshot of the thing in
action, there is no way to know 100% for certain how any pic will
look when in use due to the scaling unless someone can come up
with the scaling algorithm and/or a test program to display the
usplash on the fly.
Okay... I suggest that every artist makes both a normal version,
without additional scaling, and a "corrected" version of whatever
images they have proposed. I think that this would be best. You
could use the normally scaled image as reference to see which one
actually looks best, and the other once we've decided which is
going to be used.
Yeah, this might be the best way to limit the amount of confusion
but I guess it is a little late now to start this policy.
Look, I really don't care what kind of policy is put in place, but
what I do care about is that people's artwork submissions are equally
judged. It's nonsense to say that you'll judge someone's art
differently or even not at all because they didn't adhere to an
unwritten rule about scaling artwork. As long as this is confirmed,
I'm fine with anything.
In short: you really should provide normal-sized screens, both
for reasons of comparison and for compatibility with future
splash screens that might not be affected by squishing (maybe
when EFI becomes the new standard, for example...); if you don't
have any normal-sized screens, then don't worry about it.
Michiel
Due to the amount of work involved with redrawing all the pics
without the pre-scaling for the aspect ratio scaling later, I
won't unless someone asks specifically for this :-)
I keep layered and full-color versions of all my files in case we
ever have the need for it later. I think others should assume this
as well, just in case, although it's not really necessary now.
The problem is that I am actually drawing the pic differently for
the pre-scaled versions, so in the end it means maintaining two
versions of the same graphic and always changing them both when one
is changed.
I don't get why you would want that. All that happens with the
scaling is the image being squished and then later stretched back to
normal. The only effect would be a loss in quality; not a loss in
proportions or composition. I don't see why you would want to
maintain two versions.
Michiel
Bye,
Ken
--
ubuntu-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
