Awesome! Thanks. :) It will be great to get a decent result from cubic again. -C On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Øyvind Kolås <pippin@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:03 AM, C R <cajhne@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I assume the reasoning behind using cubic as the default for all the > scale > > and transform tools is to cut back on the complaints of how slow GIMP is > at > > the moment, but the quality loss in the current cubic interpolation > > algorithm is quite bad. > > > > Can we shift the default to No Halo or Lo Halo? > > Also, it's probably safe to assume that if the user chooses an > > interpolation type in the tool, they are saying something about the > quality > > of the results they are after vs speed. I think setting the value in one > > tool should set the value automatically in other tools, and treat it as a > > "global" value of sorts. > > I've pushed code to GEGL master that makes the resamplers called > "linear" and "cubic" do a tiny bit more than just interpolation. These > operations now do a (possibly sparse) box-filtering when scaling down > instead of scaling up. Doing point sampling with interpolated values > is probably not what a user expect "cubic" or "linear" scaling down to > be anyways,. even if this is what it currently is. GEGL now does a 2x2 > averaging of values for bilinear and a 4x4 sparse box filter averaging > for cubic. Due to how this code uses whole pixels for averaging it > might yield slightly sharper result than nohalo in many cases. > _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
