>Nope, the point is that interpolation is wrong when scaling down you >as will happen when scaling down using an affine transform or a >perspective transform. By transforming the corners of a pixel, one >would get an idea about the size needed for the resampling kernel. > >If you scale a image to 10% of the original size using cubic, you have >a situation where the data for each destination pixel is taken from a >region of 4x4pixel, whilst it should at least be taken from a region >of 10x10pixels, 84% of the image data is thrown away. OK, the handling of scaling down is not yet in the proposition Could we not just add the scale factor to the API ? _______________________________________________ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
