From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Third Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Image transformation filter for upscaled images Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 21:59:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <871rcpo3nm.fsf@gnus.org> <87v9a1l4d7.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14743"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Evgeny Zajcev , Stefan Kangas , emacs-devel To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 08 23:00:15 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNvD-0003kz-1f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 23:00:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40152 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNvC-0004o9-2s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 17:00:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54072) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNuM-0004MC-4t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 16:59:22 -0500 Original-Received: from outbound.soverin.net ([116.202.65.218]:33179) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNuJ-0006f5-Ub for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 16:59:21 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (unknown [10.10.3.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by outbound.soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7E39600F5; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 21:59:17 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (smtp.soverin.net [159.69.232.142]) by soverin.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=idiocy.org; s=soverin; t=1615240757; bh=aGdIXMaKHPcwOTZE85jcddqyNHU6RJly9d6G/QEM/F0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=g7vCE/ntxE5Qix3e3MwQmqKjZhgFRBi7DNnKWbAlrUQACU4iuWWHovF+hNHHq/Vzb zoye2pd2zrbj5YbctquTBv9DHsGeEJgMdbE5MAvrKeG6XiIbjq00IIBsjRw4RKU3Q8 9X/MqDQmvD9bfjHhGa05yiNMzlIMOpXtfW2ZUoF6NLNTgFhInq6ArSXwHITRkk0/ZV Ugekb4AENdivZyctfOTftqaa1iH9vZ+qFNk8zZ8t4l6/GUNduuqv/1COKsgYQMvK9C 1Z4C/fmb57i08x55xAQ5qDnQczL34un7mQNHqgFmkGTIE6C4cKJt+R74RZj0Ioivau zPziKxnqgvUoA== Original-Received: by breton.holly.idiocy.org (Postfix, from userid 501) id C98AF202AD423D; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 21:59:14 +0000 (GMT) Mail-Followup-To: Alan Third , Lars Ingebrigtsen , Evgeny Zajcev , Stefan Kangas , emacs-devel Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87v9a1l4d7.fsf@gnus.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.65.218; envelope-from=alan@idiocy.org; helo=outbound.soverin.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266225 Archived-At: On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 10:31:16PM +0100, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Alan Third 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? -- Alan Third