Re: image upscaling
- From: Vladimir Jovic <vladaspams@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:42:57 +0200
Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
"Vladimir Jovic" <vladaspams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:h6b167$qoq$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am working on a project where a device samples a 2d data (97 lines,
150-650 points in a line), and I should display this in a 900x700 pixels
window. This device spits out 10-30 frames per second, and is not possible
to get a higher resolution.
I am using bilinear interpolation, and the image gets a bit blurred. There
are techniques to improve edges (like for example bicubical
interpolation), but they requires complex shaders.
http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/resize/
I haven't seen this, although I am using magick++ library to create jpg images
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_art_scaling_algorithms
I have seen this, but it is only when you zoom in 2, 3 or 4 times, that is, integer times zoom in.
http://mierendo.com/software/3d_filter_blurring/
This is a good trick (something I have been looking for), but rendering to a texture is slow operation. Correct?
You could evaluate the hanning filter or pixel art scalers. A negative
Gaussian or median filter might de-blur the image and can (I think) be done
without shaders.
Any king of 2d filtering would require a complex shader, because they (2d filters) require at least all 8 surrounding value, and that is at least 8 texture reads.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Charles E Hardwidge
- Re: image upscaling
- References:
- image upscaling
- From: Vladimir Jovic
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Wolfgang Draxinger
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Vladimir Jovic
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Charles E Hardwidge
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Vladimir Jovic
- Re: image upscaling
- From: Charles E Hardwidge
- image upscaling
- Prev by Date: Re: image upscaling
- Next by Date: Re: image upscaling
- Previous by thread: Re: image upscaling
- Next by thread: Re: image upscaling
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading