Dave, I have been working on the problem since you posted your first suggestion, and you were exactly right. Now I am trying to work out the position correlation between the scaled image and the full size image in a window. Your method maintains the original quality like I want it to.
Thanks. Roger Eller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi, > > Well maybe I misunderstand the problem then! > > In my case I have images that are around 1500 x 500 pixels in size. > I show a preview of this in a separate image which is scaled so the > width is 250 pixels and the height adjusts depending on the aspect > ratio. From re-reading the original post, Roger wants to take a > portion of the smaller preview image and scale it up. If you scale > from the preview, then a lot of data has already been lost, so he > wants to get the data from the original image, scaled from the > preview. If you take the data from the preview and then scale it, it > will become pixilated, the extent of this pixelation will obviously > depend on the size of the original and the size of the preview. In my > case the loss was just too great, and anyway, it's still much better > to scale from the original if you are looking for the best quality. > > All the Best > Dave > > >>I tried it - works fine. The original imagedata is contained in the >>copied image - so no problem with pixel loss. _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
