After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 677114 - videoscale: lanczos downscaling is not pretty
videoscale: lanczos downscaling is not pretty
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: GStreamer
Classification: Platform
Component: gst-plugins-base
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: NONE
Assigned To: GStreamer Maintainers
GStreamer Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-05-30 16:56 UTC by Jean-François Fortin Tam
Modified: 2014-11-27 13:23 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
comparing VideoScale bilinear, VideoScale Lanczos and gimp GIMP Lanczos3 (243.41 KB, image/png)
2012-05-30 16:56 UTC, Jean-François Fortin Tam
Details

Description Jean-François Fortin Tam 2012-05-30 16:56:18 UTC
Created attachment 215267 [details]
comparing VideoScale bilinear, VideoScale Lanczos and gimp GIMP Lanczos3

Pitivi uses VideoScale's method #3 (GST_VIDEO_SCALE_LANCZOS) for thumbnailing (height = 50 pixels). It seems there is a slight improvement over the default method (bilinear), but the difference is very minor and I can't help but to compare with gimp's bicubic or lanczos3 scaling that looks much better (because it's smoothed, somehow).

Attached is a screenshot comparing
- pitivi 0.15 (videoscale bilinear)
- pitivi GES (videoscale lanczos)
- the same images (from a 2K source) resized by GIMP's Lanczos

Perhaps there is something suboptimal going on with VideoScale when downscaling to small sizes? Or is it something that is done incorrectly in Pitivi's code? I tried playing with various values of the "sharpen", "shapness" and "envelope" properties, no luck.

Code:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/pitivi/tree/pitivi/timeline/thumbnailer.py#n457
(the bus-handler sets the element's props.method = 3)
Comment 1 Tim-Philipp Müller 2012-05-31 14:28:10 UTC
Just in case I didn't mention it on IRC: this scaling method is known to be buggy/crashy at least in our unit tests, so chances are it's buggy/crashy in general too, so it might not be the best idea to use this in pitivi at this point.
Comment 2 Tim-Philipp Müller 2014-11-27 13:23:06 UTC
videoscale has seen massive changes and improvements recently.

Please test again with git master, and if you still feel the downscaling is worse than expected, re-open this bug and provide a test case (e.g. png/jpeg/video file to scale, plus target size and scaling method).