Will be possible to choose a better resize algorith in Full?

Ideas for improvements and requests for new features in XnView Classic

Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview

comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Will be possible to choose a better resize algorith in Full?

Post by comuneros »

Hi,

I have noticed that the quality of the resizing in Slideshow is the sharpest that I have ever seen in a program of this tipe (beats completely at ACDSee) In quick SlideShow the quality (sharpest) is worst and similar to Full Window / Full Screen. So, what it's the downsampling algorythm in Slide show? Bicubic, Lanzos, which one?

Pierre, could be implemented the option so you can choose the downsampling algorithm in Full Window? I know that you have asked for no more requests but I think that this is a VERY VERY IMPORTANT option to consider... (you use this kind of programs to essentially see photos) In the other hand, I think that it will be not very difficult to add this option because the resampling algorithm its yet implemented for the SlideShow view.

Here are the capture images tests:

Image at SlideShow,

http://comuneros.zoto.com/img/original/ ... 1b7469.jpg

Image at Full Screen,

http://comuneros.zoto.com/img/original/ ... 54fd8-.jpg

You must open them in two Explorer windows at full size and look for example at the eyes and the hair!

Regards and thanks for your fantastic work, Pierre.

XnView 1.90 <x>
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 38837
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France

Re: Will be possible to choose a better resize algorith in F

Post by xnview »

comuneros wrote:Hi,


You must open them in two Explorer windows at full size and look for example at the eyes and the hair!

Regards and thanks for your fantastic work, Pierre.
In slideshow, i use the resize feature of Windows, not in view mode
Pierre.
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Post by comuneros »

In slideshow, i use the resize feature of Windows, not in view mode
Could be implemented a "resize by windows" option in View mode? I think that Windows resize will be fast and in my opinion is damm good (as you can see by the samples is very very SHARP) I don't understand why other viewers don't use this downsize method!!!!

Regards.
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 38837
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France

Post by xnview »

comuneros wrote:
In slideshow, i use the resize feature of Windows, not in view mode
Could be implemented a "resize by windows" option in View mode? I think that Windows resize will be fast and in my opinion is damm good (as you can see by the samples is very very SHARP) I don't understand why other viewers don't use this downsize method!!!!
For you, the slideshow view is better?
Pierre.
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Post by comuneros »

For you, the slideshow view is better?
Yes, it's sharper and more pleasant for my eyes (you can notice a better texture, a sharp defined edges and even the little grain of the image; and that gives a more realistic appearance). I found the view mode resize a little soft: I have found this "problem" in any other viewer program that I try, especially in ACDSee and FastStone. The only one that have sharp resizer is ExifPro, but you must pay for it.

So if it's no t very difficult to implement it like an option I think that many people will aprecciate it. You can see the difference in the samples of the first post... Anyone could give their opinion?
User avatar
Olivier_G
XnThusiast
Posts: 1423
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Paris, France

Post by Olivier_G »

I agree that in the screenshots shown here, the slideshow one is sharper.

It may actually be due to some sharpening in the process, rather than a better resizing method... :? ...and sharpening an image wouldn't be exactly the most faithfull way of displaying an image.
Therefore, I am 'neutral' about that issue.
What would be the impact on performance?
Olivier
User avatar
ch3n3
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:06 pm
Location: France

Post by ch3n3 »

Olivier_G wrote:]...[
What would be the impact on performance?
... and ICC ???
@+
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Post by comuneros »

Pierre, is it know if this request will be include in the final 1.90 version? I can't found anything about it in the postponed forum.

Regards.
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 38837
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France

Post by xnview »

comuneros wrote:Pierre, is it know if this request will be include in the final 1.90 version? I can't found anything about it in the postponed forum.

Regards.
Could you send me the picture to test, please?
Pierre.
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Here is the photo

Post by comuneros »

You can download the photo here:

http://picasaweb.google.com/Mirandadeaz ... 0873305570

(choose "Download Photo")

But you can try with any other image ;-)

It would be good option if the program let you choose beetween some resize algorithms in full screen mode (bicubic, bilinear, lanzos, windows resize, ...) and I think that it wouldn't very difficult to implement (I think!!!)

Regards (and sorry for my late reply)
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 38837
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France

Re: Here is the photo

Post by xnview »

comuneros wrote:You can download the photo here:

http://picasaweb.google.com/Mirandadeaz ... 0873305570

(choose "Download Photo")
The link is not correct :-(
Pierre.
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Here is the correct one

Post by comuneros »

User avatar
foxyshadis
Posts: 387
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:57 am

Post by foxyshadis »

I fully agree with Pierre's assertion that it tends to simply look like someone ran a quick sharpen over the output of bilinear, and when sizing down it's practically invisible.

Now, a "sharper resize" versus "smoother resize" is not such a bad idea, since it's an individual preference. Sharper also means slower and that any haloing and noise is amplified as well, that's the trade-off. (It's possible to sharpen without amplifying noise, but it's computationally much more expensive.)

The only time when lanczos is obviously superior is when it's at least 2x upsize or downsize. Diagonals look terrible in bilinear & bicubic, and lanczos rounds them off rather more pleasantly. (Not as well as edge-directed methods, but much faster.) That's the only time something better is really necessary, the others it's just nice to have sometimes or useless.

Actually, revising that opinion, it depends on how the original has been handled; if it's small and very sharp it'll look bad upsized with bilinear or lanczos.
comuneros
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:16 pm

Post by comuneros »

Pierre, will we find this request in a future release or it has been definitived postponed?

I think that will be a not to difficult to implement feature and many people will be glad to can choose the resize algorithm of the image. I love a free program called AWC (Automatic Wallpaper Changer) because it let you choose the downsample algorithm. You can take a look here:

http://awc.smurphy.co.uk/

As you can see at the middle of the web page you can choose between five "Stretching Method" (from bilinear to lanczos) You could implement some of them and the one that uses windows (and you) to show images in the Slideshow mode. The work is almost done ;-) (well, almost)

Could you give it a try.

Regards.
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 38837
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France

Post by xnview »

comuneros wrote:Pierre, will we find this request in a future release or it has been definitived postponed?
No, i'll try to add it in next release
Pierre.