Better name for "Low quality of resizing" option

[Igor]

There is an option called "Low quality of resizing" option (Object & animation editor, Image properties).

Could you please advice more exact and "speaking" name for this option.

See the screenshot.

Photoshop calls this option:

"Resample Image:

Nearest Neighbor (preserve hard edges)"

We should find enought short name to fit it in the window of PicturesToExe.

[Johnwnjr]

My reply doesn't seem to have appeared. What I suggested was "Downsizing" but I am not sure whether this fits the bill. John R

[canteau]

Hi Igor,

my suggestion is "increased sharpness"

regards

Bernard

[Gérard de Lux]

Photoshop calls this option:

"Resample Image:

Nearest Neighbor (preserve hard edges)"

In Photoshop, this "resample" function is used, and useful, when the size of the image is changed (wether upsizing or downsizing).

But I don't think that PTE does any re-sizing of the image - or am I mistaking? - and I don't think that the same terminology should be used to avoid confusion.

I think that this option in PTE does some sort of sharpening. In Photoshop the options are: Sharpen, Sharpen Edges, Sharpen More, Smart Sharpen, Unsharp Mask; only the last two can be fine-tuned.

Thus I would suggest "Sharpen" or "Increased sharpness" - maybe with adding (resampling) in brackets.

[Conflow]

Igor,

The english word..."Shrink" means:- reduce size of an item or make it small.

"Image-Shrink" or the alternative "Shrink-Image" may suit your purpose.

Brian. Conflow.

[kosheyar]

pls go to GenuineFractals also in photozoom pro3

[Barry Beckham]

Am I the only one who really doesn't know what this option does. I am an experienced user of PTE, but I don't know ?

I never use it, probably because I havn't done any tests to establish exactly what it does.

Igor

Can you explain the thinking behind the tool and give me some idea when you think it would be of benefit.

I understand and use resample in Photoshop but can't quite see the link with PTE

[fh1805]

Barry (and all other readers of this topic),

Here is what Jeff Evans and Lin Evans had to say about this option in their User Guide for v5.0 of PTE.

"Low quality of resizing is a feature which is useful if you are finding small white troublesome lines

above or below your image during transitions. The "low quality of resizing" is actually more accurately

called "nearest neighbor" resizing. It isn't so much "low quality" as it is "imprecise" resizing. Since it

stops at the pixel level rather than the sub pixel level of accuracy this line is eliminated in some cases.

For most this feature need not be used."

I, like Barry, have never used this option but would interpret that explanation as possibly meaning that this controls the technique used by PTE when it is forced to downsize an image e.g. when the user is using JPEG files of say 3000x2000 pixels running on a monitor of say 1280x1024.

regards,

Peter.

[Igor]

So the best name is "Nearest Neighbor Resizing"?

[Barry Beckham]

The "low quality of resizing" is actually more accurately

called "nearest neighbor" resizing. It isn't so much "low quality" as it is "imprecise" resizing. Since it

stops at the pixel level rather than the sub pixel level of accuracy this line is eliminated in some cases.

For most this feature need not be used."

Thanks Peter and no offense is meant by this but that is techno babble that the average user of PTE will not even contemplate

Here is a question for forum users Who uses it and why?

This is what goes through my mind and I appreciate it sounds a little arrogant, but here goes. I am the fussiest person you will find about about image quality, the Moire effect and any other imperfections and I have never found any reason to even investigate what it was.

So, my question is, why have it?

If you do have it, please dont call it Nearest Neighbor Resizing as that will mean even less than the current label. Better still tuck it away in the menus for those few who may use it and don't have it on display where we all say, What the hell is that .

[fh1805]

Igor,

Whilst that might be technically accurate, it is, in my opinion, too technical for the vast majority of users. My understanding of "nearest neighbour" would be the families who live in the houses each side of mine.

In what part of PTE's processing does this option, if ticked, take effect? I am not concerned to know how (technically) it affects my work with PTE but I would like to know when it is going to affect my work with PTE.

If I might make an analogy with another option on the Properties tab: I don't know what mip-mapping does technically, but I do know that its usage during animation can eliminate unwanted shimmer. The description of this feature as "Anti-shimmering (mip-mapping)" tells me both what it does and how it does it. For the user, I believe the "what" is more important than the "how".

So, this option that we are discussing in this thread might use "nearest neighbour" techniques/technology (that is the "how") - but "what" does it actually do? "What" is the benefit to the user of using this option?

regards,

Peter

[Barry Beckham]

Peter

I edited my post and while doing it you got in first

[Guest Yachtsman1]

If the size of your nearest neighbour is also incorrect, what use is it???

Yachtsman1

[Jean-Cyprien]

The name of "Low quality of resizing" is certainly not a good one : we can use it with and without "resizing" the picture, and the words "bad quality" and even "quality" are not really suitable.

It is a wonderful/powerful/useful (!!) tool when you have to place different pictures with a sharp accuracy. You can easily distinguish each pixel of the pictures. The work is easier, and the result is greatly improved by a very precise adjustment. My friend Etienne H. also usually uses it .

It can afford to make stars twinkle, or on the contrary, to transform some pixels into snowflakes.

I agree with the explanation of Lin.

I think it's not a sharpness increase, but rather a presentation without loss of sharpness.

"Loss" could mean that PTE usually damage the pictures.

My proposal is therefore "Without change of sharpness" (or neatness ? ) without other detail (or perhaps, as Photoshop : Resample without change of sharpness).

P.S. For 3D objects (like the belfry of my bell Choupinette), this tool is indispensable to avoid lines (artefact) in the corner – according to the type of file (png, jpg)

[Ken Cox]

I think Jean has said it best

"My proposal is therefore "Without change of sharpness" (or neatness ? ) without other detail (or perhaps, as Photoshop : Resample without change of sharpness)."

ken

[cjdnzl]

There is an option called "Low quality of resizing" option (Object & animation editor, Image properties).

Could you please advice more exact and "speaking" name for this option.

See the screenshot.

Photoshop calls this option:

"Resample Image:

Nearest Neighbor (preserve hard edges)"

We should find enought short name to fit it in the window of PicturesToExe.

I have just had a play around with this tool (which I normally do not use), and it appears to me to enhance or improve the image quality of a zoomed image, so I assume that Igor's current description means to 'Improve low quality of resizing'. If that is correct, my suggestion is 'Optimize resized image' or 'Enhance resized image' or 'Improve resized image' or similar.

Colin

[Igor]

Please see the attached sample show:

http://www.wnsoft.com/test/Nearest_vs_Bilinear.zip (500 KB)

Jean-Cyprien,

When a picture shown on the screen at its original size (pixel in pixel) no need to use Bilinear, Nearest or Bicubic resampling/resizing. So these algorithms are necessary only when we resize picture (larger or smaller).

For this reason I think it isn't exact to call it sharpness. In future we can add real sharpen filter and it will cause a mess with two options.

[Gérard de Lux]

Having read these interesting comments, I now understand when and how this option works! Apparently, I wasn't the only one not familiar with it.

I share Igor's concern that talking about sharpness or sharpening could be confusing, in particular if he releases later a version with a sharpen filter!

It seems to me that "resampling without loss", or something along this line, would be clear enough and have the big advantage to remain consistent with Photoshop and other graphic tools terminology. But I'm not an anglophone and I'll wait and see to adapt the French translation according to the final choice.

[Igor]

Gerard,

"Resampling without loss" seems good. But wouldn't it force an user think that he'd better to turn on this option, it something that improves quality?

Other variants

"Low quality of picture"

"Nearest (edged resizing)"

[Guest Yachtsman1]

Just had a quick look at what Elements 6 says about the subject.

Change print dimensions and resolution without resampling

You might need to change the print dimensions and resolution if you are sending the image to a print shop that requires that files be at a specific resolution.

If you are printing directly from Photoshop Elements, you don’t have to perform this procedure. Instead, you can choose a size in the Print dialog box and Photoshop Elements applies the appropriate image resolution.

Note: To change only the print dimensions or the resolution, and adjust the total number of pixels in the image proportionately, you must resample the image.

1.In the Editor, choose Image > Resize > Image Size.

2.Make sure that Resample Image is deselected. If deselected, you can change the print dimensions and resolution without changing the total number of pixels in the image, but the image may not keep its current proportions.

Note: Resample Image must be selected in order to use the Constrain Proportions and Scale Style functions.

3.To maintain the current aspect ratio, select Constrain Proportions. This option automatically updates the width as you change the height, and vice versa.

4.Under Document Size, enter new values for the height and width. If desired, choose a new unit of measurement. Note that for Width, the Columns option uses the width and gutter sizes specified in the Units & Rulers preferences.

5.For Resolution, enter a new value. If desired, choose a new unit of measurement, and then click OK.

I suppose one or even two words needs careful choice.

Yachtsman1.

[Jean-Cyprien]

Igor,

Perhaps I don't understand exactly what you mean.

I think it's quite impossible to have 1 pixel of the picture on exactly 1 pixel of the screen. The sceen software, Windows… resize the picture.

What I mean is : if you have a picture of 1201x1800 pixels, put in PTE with a virtual size of slide of exactly 1201x1800, in that case, PTE has no resizing to do (is it correct ?). But even in that case, the tool "Low quality of resizing" is working perfectly and makes a (sometimes great) difference between the results. See my example : on my screen there is a lot a differences.

Resizing.zip

[Igor]

Jean-Cyprien,

I think it's quite impossible to have 1 pixel of the picture on exactly 1 pixel of the screen. The sceen software, Windows… resize the picture.

PicturesToExe can display given picture exactly pixel in pixel on a display:

The simple example - 1024x768 images on fullscreen of LCD 1024x768.

Or fixed size of slide. Please see my sample show:

http://www.wnsoft.com/test/Nearest2.zip

At the beginning of this demo there is no difference between Bilinear and Nearest. Because video card recognize this case and draw picture pixel in pixel without resampling.

I used fixed slide size 512x512 and two pictures of 512x512 each. One placed onto Mask to show difference.

This option "Low quality of resizing" is closely linked with resizing/resampling and I don't know what is the best name for this.

[Jean-Cyprien]

Yes Igor,

In the case the virtual size of slides is smaller than the screen, with fixed size of slide ticked, you are quite right ! 1 pixel picture = 1 pixel sceen

And I can see NO difference, with your example or "my" radiotelescop"

[Rickl]

Hi Igor,

If I understand this thread correctly, you offer two options for resampling...

I use Mike Chaney's Qimage for all my printing, and he uses the term 'Interpolation Type' to prompt for the query I think you are trying to ask for with "Low quality of resizing"

Dick

[Picsel]

I full agree with Peter, better to say "what" rather than "how"

After viewing Igor sample I would suggest : "zoom in/out opitimization" or "up/downscaling optimization"

Daniel