This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Computer Graphics with Photoshop > March 2007 > PS' internal interpolation algorithms
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
PS' internal interpolation algorithms
|
|
| ronviers@gmail.com 2007-03-05, 6:14 pm |
| Hi,
Do we as users have any control of which interpolation algorithms PS
uses internally to resize objects and pixels for display and
rasterization?
Thanks,
Ron
| |
|
| In article <1173067725.193792.162170@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
> Do we as users have any control of which interpolation algorithms PS
> uses internally to resize objects and pixels for display and
> rasterization?
Yes. It will use whatever you set in the Preferences for interpolation
during rotation, skewing, free transform, and so forth.
It always uses a crude interpolation for on-screen viewing.
No interpolation is used for rasterizing a vector object.
--
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
| |
| ronviers@gmail.com 2007-03-05, 6:14 pm |
| On Mar 5, 2:49 pm, tacit <tac...@aol.com> wrote:
> Yes. It will use whatever you set in the Preferences for interpolation
> during rotation, skewing, free transform, and so forth.
> Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
So this goes for rasterizing resized smart objects?
Thanks
| |
| tacit 2007-03-05, 10:14 pm |
| In article <1173129665.636261.188310@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>
> So this goes for rasterizing resized smart objects?
If you resize a vector smart object, it is still vector. No
interpolation is done. When you rasterize it, it is rasterized at that
size, which does not involve interpolation.
--
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
| |
| ronviers@gmail.com 2007-03-05, 10:14 pm |
| On Mar 5, 6:43 pm, tacit <tac...@aol.com> wrote:
> In article <1173129665.636261.188...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "ronvi...@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronvi...@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>
>
> If you resize a vector smart object, it is still vector. No
> interpolation is done. When you rasterize it, it is rasterized at that
> size, which does not involve interpolation.
>
> --
> Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
Wouldn't a rasterized smart object be a special case vector in the
sense that it is derived directly from pixels not mathematically and
therefore interpolation must occur because the resulting image is not
the same size as the original?
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|