comparison of enlargements produced with two GIMP methods, three GEGL methods, and three candidate GEGL methods

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I have created 6.11x enlargements with two GIMP methods, three GEGL
methods, and three candidate GEGL methods for which patches are
provided in

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=619314

The enlargements, named a.png to h.png, are found in the 15M tar archive

http://web.cs.laurentian.ca/nrobidoux/misc/catenlargementtests.tgz

To know which method was used to produce each image, read the KEY text file.

One of the three candidate methods is very fast. The total runtime for
the creation of the enlargement with upsmooth is only 15% more than
with bilinear.
Only one of the three candidate methods is slower than GEGL bicubic
(upsharp, by 30%).

Nicolas Robidoux

PS

Warning: the upsize, upsmooth and upsharp samplers already in GEGL are
prototypes of the methods showcased in the above enlargement test.
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


[Index of Archives]     [Video For Linux]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]     [gtk]     [GIMP for Windows]     [KDE]     [GEGL]     [Gimp's Home]     [Gimp on GUI]     [Gimp on Windows]     [Steve's Art]

  Powered by Linux