vrankin Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 I'm using the Minolta Dimage Viewer software to resize images; some down, for Photo.net postings, and some up, for enlarged printing. When is it better to use bilinear mode, and when bicubic mode? Minolta's software gives me the choice. I'm somewhat confused, after searching through a few posts on this subject that went into other areas of discussion, i.e. Genuine Fractals, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 bi-cubic is always better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_rodney1 Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 Bicubic smoother for sizing up, Bicubic sharper for sizing down. I found GF Pro to be basically worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendel_leisk Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 Vuescan's downsample technique seems to be similar to Photoshop's "nearest neighbour", a distance third in the smoothness race, as noted here: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BcsU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emre Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 ...and all of 'em are pretty outdated. These software companies should read some scientific papers: http://graphics.cs.msu.su/en/research/scaling/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorgeortega Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 Take a lood at this. ftp://ftp.bmtmicro.com/bmtmicro/DLC_WEB/Picture%20Window%20(BMT%20Micro)/Picture%20Window%20Doc/Resampling.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_tuthill Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 For certain resizing values, e.g. (depending on software) 25% 33% 50% 67% 75% and 200%, bilinear and bicubic produce identical results. Because bilinear is faster, you might as well use that. Emre has a good point. At values not mentioned above, Lanczos seems better for downsampling than Bicubic Sharper, and certain extra-cost algorithms beat Bicubic Smoother for upsampling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beno_t_marchal Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 <p>Bilinear works well with schematic, bicubic is the one to use for photos. <p>--ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vrankin Posted April 5, 2005 Author Share Posted April 5, 2005 Thanks, everyone. I followed your links, where suggested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mendel_leisk Posted April 5, 2005 Share Posted April 5, 2005 'nother link: http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/main/foto/down_sample/example1.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now