Jump to content

Pixelation Problem


0hi
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3670 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

When I reduce the size of an image the pixels become blurred. Is there a program on the web that keeps the pixels as sharp as the original pixels were? I'm using Photoshop CS5 so if that can be done using that, that would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you show us an example of what you describe as 'blurred' ? Photoshop's resampling algorithms aren't particularly awful... in fact there's several of them for you to choose, in case you don't like the standard 'bicubic' one; nevertheless, all of them just do what they have to do (what in fact you ask them to do), which is to represent the original image with less pixels, and thus loose detail... that could be construed as 'blurring' the image, but there's no helping that; you just can't avoid losing detail when downsampling (unless the original image was, in turn, oversampled... but that's another story).

Still, if it feels like you've lost detail and none of the resampling algorithms completely satisfy you, what you can do is to apply some Smart Sharpen after downsizing... do it with a very, very small radius and strength, that might improve the perceived sharpness of the downsized image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that are the sizes and ratio between them you are most certainly doing something wrong, like not using the best algorithm.

But is the small picture that size or did you scale it up from a much smaller one just to show?

What are the sizes pixels wide by pixels height for the original and for the resized picture?

:smileysurprised::):smileyvery-happy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SL only allows 1,024 size photos the last image is very very small like 76x57  it doesn't appear as though any program would help. These are images I'm trying to make an animated frame, 150 of them to be exact.  10 accross by 15 down. lol  The size in photoshop is 12,800 x 4,320  then reduce down to 1,024  I think impossiable lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you see in that 76x57 pixel picture is what there is, you can't squeeze more information out of it

I guess the reason it is blurry is because SL makes it blurry to hide the pixels

:smileysurprised::):smileyvery-happy:

The animation may look good even though the single frames are not high resolution

Link to comment
Share on other sites


0hi wrote:

sample 3.png


 

Oh hi, Ohi!

Yep, you've run into the resolution limit for SL textures of 1024x1024. You can get some improvement by using Photoshop to resize your image to 1024x1024. This way you'll carry the maximum number of pixels into SL. The aspect ratio of your image will be wrong, but you can fix that by setting the aspect ratio of the prim face on which you animate your texture.

The size of the image you posted is 1024 x 346, which SL will convert either to 1024x512, or perhaps even 1024x256 (texture dimensions are always powers of two). By resampling down to 1024x1024 in Photoshop, you'll prevent SL from squishing even further. While this isn't what you're hoping for, it's still 2-4x better than what you've got.

Here's what you'd import to SL (I squished your example to 512x512, you'd do 1024x1024)...

Ohi Test.jpg

Good luck!

ETA: Each of your frames in this example (presuming 1024x1024) would be 102.4x166.6 pixels. Lowering the number of frames would give each frame more pixels to work with, so it's a tradeoff of frames vs. resolution, always constrained by the one million pixel maximum of SL textures.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3670 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...