Talk:Image scaling

message: This image shows the annoying effect that pixels of the original image are now squares
Not really very formal is it?
138.243.129.4 11:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not currently an issue. yoyo (talk) 18:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly casual language 

message: This article (and the linked articles) seem entirely focussed on Image enlargement. It would be good if reduction, and the effect of differing scaling routines on image quality were discussed. Particularly with regard to preservation of finer detail. 
* With multi-megapixel cameras ubiquitous these days, I find I'm scaling images down for web publishing and emailing a lot.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EasyTarget (talk • contribs) 09:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image reduction 

message: Do you think this article should say something about the "zoom and enhance" thing seen in CSI, etc.? Yes, I know it's impossible in real life, but lots of wiki articles have an "in popular culture" section. 'FLaRN'(talk) 21:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zoom...now enhance... 

message: I noticed that this article has been moved from Pixel art scaling algorithms to Image scaling. The more general name needs to touch on algorithms intended for continuous tone images such as photographs and high-quality CGI, such as linear, cubic, and sinc resampling. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 13:28, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now that the article has been renamed 

message: I want to use one of them in my project. Which is the best? As for me Hqx is the better choice. Your arguments? 178.49.101.206 (talk) 07:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  And which is the best? 

message: The source image used has poorly rendered text, which makes it hard to tell whether or not the output is acceptable or not.  Also, the excessive fades make it nearly impossible to tell the difference between each algorithm.  Also, algorithm is spelled incorrectly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.85.79 (talk) 03:12, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Example Video

message: As stated at the top of this page, the section to be split off was in fact recently merged into this article. This would seem to be the correct place for it. The lede says that the article is about digital images, so it is not as if e.g. analogue scaling has been "unfairly" sidelined. The article may well need to be improved, but it does not need to be split. Op47 (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split tag 

message: The image containing the word "Wiki" already has antialiased edges, which makes it perhaps not as clear as possible where the antialiasing in the example output images comes from. The nearest-neighbour interpolated image, in particular, shows the antialiased edge, but it's really just showing the intermediate-valued pixels that are already in the original. Bernd Jendrissek (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Poor choice example image

message: Which of the sentences extracted from the same paragraph is correct?
-> Super Eagle [...] is similar to the 2×SaI engine, but does more blending
-> Super 2×SaI [...] blends more than the Super Eagle engine  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.68.160.227 (talk) 16:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super 2xSaI and Super Eagle 

message: :"Eagle works as follows: for every in pixel we will generate 4 out pixels. First, set all 4 to the colour of the in pixel we are currently scaling (as nearest-neighbor). Next look at the pixels up and to the left; if they are the same colour as each other, set the top left pixel to that colour. Continue doing the same for all four pixels, and then move to the next one."
This is different from the implementation, which checks 3 pixels instead of 2. I assume the pseudo-code is right and the text is incomplete. ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.245.94.186 (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eagle 

message: Thanks to the lack of information provided by the original uploader, of this article, I am presented with a wonderful pseudocode of the Eagle algorithm, but the 2xSaI algorithm remains left out. I need somebody to post it to Wiki here so I can implement it in a project I'm creating. I tried looking at the C source-code from its creator, but reading that code left my head spinning. Maybe somebody who's a wikipedian and who has significant knowledge of the workings of this specific algorithm can post it up here in this Wiki article for me as simple pseudo code for me so I can implement it in the software I'm writing. Benhut1 (talk) 09:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the 2xSaI pseudocode? 

message: The HQ4x fish has very poor quality in the image that compares the original, HQ4x and 4xBRZ. It looks like the image that came from HQ4x has been saved in some lossy format like jpeg before it was enlarged and saved in PNG again. The image need to be updated, or removed, because as it is now it gives the impression that HQ4x is much worse than it really is. 90.227.25.67 (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The poor quality has been fixed and the image has been moved to Pixel art scaling algorithms. Pjeo (talk) 16:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor quality image 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Image scaling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101126091759/http://neuron2.net/library/nedi.pdf to http://neuron2.net/library/nedi.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20041221052401/http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu:80/~bai/ECS231/finaltzeng.pdf to http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~bai/ECS231/finaltzeng.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The image scaling article had become a bloated mess, mostly devoted to comparison galleries of images produced by a seemingly endless list of various fairly trivial algorithms. I've now de-merged the pixel art stuff into its own article, but too much of this article is still devoted to blow-by-blow comparisons of individual algorithms with inline images that takes up a lot of space to say very little. There is a good article to be written on image scaling, which is a subject with surprisingly deep ramifications into machine vision and the psychophysics of vision, but this isn't yet it. -- The Anome (talk) 10:23, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice, I have wanted to do that myselfCarewolf (talk) 12:47, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  De-bloating, and a start on re-writing 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Image scaling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160214121631/http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/papers/ICIP2000a.pdf to http://www.csee.wvu.edu/~xinl/papers/ICIP2000a.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, 
Should the resolution enhancement in the third sentence of the introduction
″ In video technology, the magnification of digital material is known as upscaling or resolution enhancement.″
link to, as it currently does, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_enhancement_technology
or wouldn't
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-resolution_imaging
be better?
37.136.2.21 (talk) 10:30, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super resolution vs Resolution enhancement technology