When reducing the size of an image from, say 20,000px x 10,000px, to 1000 x 500, is there a quality difference between typing the sizes in the Width and Height on the toolbar vs its toolbar neighbour Scale By Percentage?
Attachment 134788
Printable View
When reducing the size of an image from, say 20,000px x 10,000px, to 1000 x 500, is there a quality difference between typing the sizes in the Width and Height on the toolbar vs its toolbar neighbour Scale By Percentage?
Attachment 134788
never noticed a quality difference chris, although I use mostly PNG not JPG
@Chris, there ought not to be.
Xara keeps its images unpacked and only applies compression when rendering or exporting.
Acorn
@acorn you are more technical than I am
my understanding is that the render you see in the workspace is not the image itself - altering the view quality being the most obvious example - there may be small rounding issues with the workspace render, and these may differ between the methods, and JPG artifacts may play a part... but non of this affects the actual image [what you said effectively ?]
@handrawn, more or less.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
Inputting an actual size or a percentage will only be affecting the numeric calculation not the render.
@Chris - try this.
Size and scale to create two "identical" images.
In the Bitmap gallery, right-click each image and in its Image Properties: Untick Smooth when scaled up.
Now Zoom in and you will now see individual pixels unsmoothed.
Easier to make a value judgement.
Acorn
Thank you both. This started with a friend casually talking about reducing images for emailing. He made the comment that reducing by percentage retained the quality of a photo, whereas picking a pre-determined size from the options didn't. He was talking about mobile phones, but it had me wondering.