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 > > downsharp and downsmooth > > or > > sharpdownsize and smoothdownsize > > for the samplers tuned for warps which mostly downsample (e.g., for > producing thumbnails). > > ----- > > It turns out that the above schemes have cheap/less cheap > versions. What I am thinking of doing is either prefixing or suffixing > the above names with the word "fast" for the faster/lower quality > versions, for example > > fastsharpupsize and fastsmoothupsize > > which would correspond to nohalo level 1 and snohalo level 1, while > sharpupsize and smoothupsize would correspond to s/nohalo level 2. > > Feedback welcome. > > Nicolas Robidoux > Laurentian University > _______________________________________________ > Gegl-developer mailing list > Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer > > > I do not see any reason why one would have to specify up or downsize in the parameter since this can be determined from the in and output size, what about translations? If the difference between FastSharpUpsize and SharpUpsize is qualty then it should not be named "Fast", FastSharp(Up|Down)size => SampleSharpGood => SharpGood Sharp(Up|Down)size => SampleSharpBetter => SharpBetter FastSmooth(Up|Down)size => SampleSmootGood => SmoothGood FastSmooth(Up|Down)size => SampleSmootBetter => SmoothBetter Or jus split it in 2 parameters, one for quality and one for effect. Geert _______________________________________________ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
