This turned out to be the -q flag. I didn't realize that faststone defaulted to a higher than nConvert setting them to the same here produced roughly equal quality.
Thank you for the help.
Search found 4 matches
- Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:31 pm
- Forum: NConvert
- Topic: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
- Replies: 8
- Views: 3761
- Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:54 pm
- Forum: NConvert
- Topic: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
- Replies: 8
- Views: 3761
Re: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
I just tired using XnConvert and it produced better quality than nConvert using the same settings?
- Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:45 pm
- Forum: NConvert
- Topic: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
- Replies: 8
- Views: 3761
Re: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
yes they are different, as I can't seem to find Lanczcos3 in nconvert at least not using the -help command or readme files which seems to be the only real documentation.
nconvert -out jpeg -ratio -rtype lanczos -resize 700 0 -o %%_SWH_W700_nuttytales.net.jpg "%~1"\
I don't need to do batches I ...
nconvert -out jpeg -ratio -rtype lanczos -resize 700 0 -o %%_SWH_W700_nuttytales.net.jpg "%~1"\
I don't need to do batches I ...
- Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:31 pm
- Forum: NConvert
- Topic: Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
- Replies: 8
- Views: 3761
Downsampled image has lower quality than expected
Hi, I am use to using Faststone Image resizer, but need to do resizing with bat files which it doesn't support.
When using nconvert however the image quality is substantially lower.
I've included a source attachment and the goal is to reduce it to 333px 333px [odd number's but that's just because ...
When using nconvert however the image quality is substantially lower.
I've included a source attachment and the goal is to reduce it to 333px 333px [odd number's but that's just because ...