Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #14671

Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear.

Show all headers | View raw

In article 
<9d143d01-dcf4-4343-9477-3ffbcd3027e1@ra8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
 Dangling Pointer <dpointer2@gmail.com> wrote:

> On the positive side, SCALE_AREA_AVERAGING doesn't seem to be as slow 
> in Java 6 as it is reputed to be (possibly this reputation is based 
> on the performance of older versions). So I'll be using that for now.

Thank you for reporting your (extensive) findings. It sounds like you
are aware, but for reference: The Perils of Image.getScaledInstance()

<http://today.java.net/pub/a/today/2007/04/03/perils-of-image-getscaledinstance.html>

The last time I encountered such resampling problems, it turned out
to be an artifact inserted earlier in my pipeline that only became 
apparent in a later stage. FWIW, I had good results from ImageJ's 
bicubic interpolation implementation. I needed both 8- and 16-bit 
versions, with endian control for the latter, and it proved easy to 
script.

I'm not sure it's relevant, but I've occasionally had to specify 
the platform renderer instead of Sun’s 2D renderer:

    if (System.getProperty("os.name").startsWith("Mac OS X")) {
        System.setProperty("apple.awt.graphics.UseQuartz", "true");
    }

-- 
John B. Matthews
trashgod at gmail dot com
<http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Dangling Pointer <dpointer2@gmail.com> - 2012-05-18 22:58 -0700
  Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-05-18 23:12 -0700
    Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-05-20 22:23 -0700
  Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-19 07:26 -0400
    Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Dangling Pointer <dpointer2@gmail.com> - 2012-05-19 08:07 -0700
      Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Dangling Pointer <dpointer2@gmail.com> - 2012-05-19 09:13 -0700
        Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2012-05-19 20:48 +0200
        Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2012-05-20 09:02 -0400
        Re: Bicubic interpolation suddenly is no better than bilinear. BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-05-20 11:59 -0500

csiph-web