On Thu, 2002-12-19 at 18:34, Patrick McFarland wrote: > On 20-Dec-2002, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:29:08PM -0000, matt@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > That's what I thought as well...but the scaling with imagemagick was causing > > > pixelation. > > > > Scaling up or down? With which filter? (You're sure you resampled and not did > > a simple quick rescale, right?) > > If your're scaling down in gimp, go into preferences, and change scaling mode > to linear. Cubic sucks for scaling down, and Im not sure why Gimp even allows > users to make a choice (bicubic and such are always used for scaling up, > bilinear and such are always used for scaling down.) Do you even use gimp? When downsampling gimp will use bilinear filtering even when bicubic is specified. There are usefull techniques that require the use of nearest neighbor or bilinear resampling. I'm not sure why gimp would do a better job of downsampling than imagemagick. It doesnt do anything fancy, just a rectangular area-sample. -- Jay Cox <jaycox@xxxxxxxx>
