11–20 of 32 posts
You're never going to kill the pixel until you have a display that doesn't use them.
TLDR: Imagine a CRT/Osciloscope not sweeping row by row but instead line by line, where line doesn't necessarily mean horizontal but can be diagonal and even turn midway.
Ultimately however vectors are far more expensive to rasterize than bitmaps, especially if you want antialiasing along edges. There was a bunch of noise a while back about NVIDIA's path rendering extension -- they do antialiasing via 16x multisampling (!!!) NOT a mobile friendly approach.
Aren't HiDPI displays killing pixels?
You're never going to kill the pixel until you have a display that doesn't use them.
If JPG and video codecs already store information in terms of wavelets, frequencies, or whatever have you --
Are there any programs that will render JPG or videos at a higher-than-native resolution?
I know you're not gaining any extra signal. But if you have a 320x240 video, and you want to play it full-screen at 1280x960 -- instead of rendering at 320x240 and then naively upscaling 4x, would some kind of direct codec rendering to 1280x960 possibly produce more accurate results?
If the codec/format is doing a good job at extracting "meaning" from the original image for its compression, it seems like it ought to.
Slightly side question: If JPG and video codecs already store information in terms of wavelets, frequencies, or whatever have you -- Are there any programs that will render JPG or videos at a higher-than-native resolution? I know you're not gaining any extra signal. But if you have a 320x240 video, and you want to play it full-screen at 1280x960 -- instead of rendering at 320x240 and then naively upscaling 4x, would…
Slightly side question: If JPG and video codecs already store information in terms of wavelets, frequencies, or whatever have you -- Are there any programs that will render JPG or videos at a higher-than-native resolution? I know you're not gaining any extra signal. But if you have a 320x240 video, and you want to play it full-screen at 1280x960 -- instead of rendering at 320x240 and then naively upscaling 4x, would…
edit: While googling i didn't find good information on how those hardware upscalers work, but it seems to be the case that it's mostly some pixel based stuff with edge detection and interpolation based on the resulting pixel map.
It's a Sample. There are many ways to filter a collection of samples to reconstruct an image. Drawing bigger squares with nearest-neighbor sampling is only one of them. Depending on the context of your application, you might even go as far as the linked article: http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/84040-depixelizing-pixel-a...
You're never going to kill the pixel until you have a display that doesn't use them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_monitor TLDR: Imagine a CRT/Osciloscope not sweeping row by row but instead line by line, where line doesn't necessarily mean horizontal but can be diagonal and even turn midway.