Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 09:09:55AM -0400, Jose Gonzalez wrote: > >> Errr.. I mean in your example one *would* jpg-downscale to 32, >> and the software down-scale to 31. The result, with 'smooth-scaling' >> would be quite good. >> > > I think it is better to downscale only the *second* nearest power-of-two > fraction and use full downscaling from that. That mean stay with 64 go > down from that. >
You can test this yourself very easily right now to see the difference with your example case. Take your test 64x64 jpg image file as you want. Then, using a software-x11 evas, create two image objects. One you will load the jpg without any size load-opts, and the other with the size load-opts set to scale it to 32x32. Then, set both image objs to have smooth-scaling to true, their obj size to 31x31 and their image-fill-size to the same, and render the evas. This will smooth-scale the first one from 64 to 31 and the second from 32 to 31 (where the 32x32 will come from jpg-down-scaling), and you'll have your comparison right there. ____________________________________________________________ Find the right teaching school to meet your educational needs. Click to learn more. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3njBiMcP0WVpoDiiRrzq3D73GUBGxgotDlmPfug0IrYukFde/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
