Re: Image transformation filter for upscaled images

[Evgeny Zajcev <lg.zevlg@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1091 bytes --]

вт, 9 мар. 2021 г. в 00:59, Alan Third <alan@idiocy.org>:

> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 10:31:16PM +0100, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> > Alan Third <alan@idiocy.org> writes:
> >
> > > I don't know, I'd be inclined to go with adding an image option, like
> > > ":filter smooth" or ":filter nearest" and letting mode authors choose
> > > what they think is best.
> >
> > Yes, that's an excellent idea.
>
> Not my idea, but certainly a good one. :)
>
> > > (Also, I think :filter may be taken, so perhaps just ":smooth t/nil"
> > > or something...)
> >
> > Sure.  Or...  :scaling-algorithm...
>
> I was wrong, :filter is available, I'll have a bit more of a think
> about what we want to call it.
>
> As for default behaviour, I'm inclined to stick with what we have
> where scaling down uses best and scaling up uses nearest neighbour but
> any use of :filter (or whatever) over-rides the default. Anyone have
> an opinion? Do we just want to use best everywhere by default?
>

I vote for "best" everywhere by default, making doc-view shine out-of-box

-- 
lg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1693 bytes --]