Jagged Graphics - Revision history

Dave at 18:51, 8 January 2012

2012-01-08T18:51:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:51, 8 January 2012
Line 3:		Line 3:
	It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. I have turned on "CoreGraphics" on mac and GDI+ on windows, so now kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, which makes it a bit fuzzy, but i think it does look marginally better.		It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. I have turned on "CoreGraphics" on mac and GDI+ on windows, so now kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, which makes it a bit fuzzy, but i think it does look marginally better.

	'''Update:''' I've now ~~enabled~~ HQX smoothing, which i think looks a bit better. You can turn it ~~off~~ in the prefs if you ~~don't~~ like it.		'''Update:''' I've now added optional HQX smoothing, which i think looks a bit better. You can turn it on in the General prefs if you like it. WARNING: it is very CPU intensive. If your computer slows to a crawl, then turn it off.
	<br>		<br>
	{\|border="1"		{\|border="1"

Dave at 02:31, 23 September 2011

2011-09-23T02:31:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:31, 23 September 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the graphics jagged?		Why are the graphics jagged?

	It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. I have turned on "CoreGraphics" on mac and GDI+ on windows, so now kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, which makes it a bit fuzzy, but i think it does look marginally better:<br>		It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. I have turned on "CoreGraphics" on mac and GDI+ on windows, so now kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, which makes it a bit fuzzy, but i think it does look marginally better.

			'''Update:''' I've now enabled HQX smoothing, which i think looks a bit better. You can turn it off in the prefs if you don't like it.
			<br>
	{\|border="1"		{\|border="1"
	\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png		\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png
	\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png		\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png
			\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_3.png
	\|-		\|-
	\| align="center" \| "Nearest Neighbor" (before)		\| align="center" \| "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nearest-neighbor_interpolation Nearest Neighbor]" (before)
	\| align="center" \| "Bicubic Smoothing" (after)		\| align="center" \| "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation Bicubic Smoothing]" (after)
			\| align="center" \| "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hqx Hq4x Smoothing]" (after)
	\|}		\|}

Dave at 00:38, 18 November 2010

2010-11-18T00:38:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:38, 18 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the graphics jagged?		Why are the graphics jagged?

	It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. ~~Now, if you turn~~ on "CoreGraphics" ~~(advanced prefs)~~, ~~then~~ kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, but ~~that will only~~ look marginally better:<br>		It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. I have turned on "CoreGraphics" on mac and GDI+ on windows, so now kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, which makes it a bit fuzzy, but i think it does look marginally better:<br>
	http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png		{\|border="1"
	http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png		\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png
			\| http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png
			\|-
			\| align="center" \| "Nearest Neighbor" (before)
			\| align="center" \| "Bicubic Smoothing" (after)
			\|}

Dave at 00:52, 6 December 2009

2009-12-06T00:52:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:52, 6 December 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the graphics jagged?		Why are the graphics jagged?

	It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. Now I could do a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on ~~them~~, but that will only look marginally better:<br>		It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. Now, if you turn on "CoreGraphics" (advanced prefs), then kJams will do [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on the graphics, but that will only look marginally better:<br>
	http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png		http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png
	http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png		http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png

	~~Eventually I'll turn on smoothing but right now it's a performance loss for many people, that is why it is off by default.~~

Dave at 02:29, 24 July 2009

2009-07-24T02:29:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:29, 24 July 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the graphics jagged?		Why are the graphics jagged?

	It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV, the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, ~~but it~~ still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. Now I could do a bicubic smoothing on them, but that will only look marginally better:<br>		It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" or "vectors" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV (720 x 480), the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, which more or less fills the screen and with the colorized border still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. Now I could do a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicubic_interpolation bicubic] smoothing on them, but that will only look marginally better:<br>
	http://kjams.com/resources/~~bicubic_smooth~~.png~~<br>~~		http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_1.png
			http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_2.png

	Eventually I'll turn on smoothing but right now it's a performance loss for many people, that is why it is off by default.		Eventually I'll turn on smoothing but right now it's a performance loss for many people, that is why it is off by default.

Dave: New page: Why are the graphics jagged? It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216....

2009-07-22T19:10:09Z

New page: Why are the graphics jagged? It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216....

New page

Why are the graphics jagged?

It's because the text and graphics are actually bitmaps, they're not "fonts" actually, they're made of pixels. The dimensions of CD+G graphics are 300 x 216. You'll notice that's very, very small. Now, when you display this on a "Standard Def" TV, the pixels are doubled so you get 600 x 432, but it still looks pretty good. The "problem" is when you view the graphics on a computer monitor or HDTV where you've got orders of magnitude more pixels to go around. Your original graphic is 300 x 216, so you have to STRETCH that to fill in more pixels. You know what happens when you zoom in to pixels? You get jaggies. Now I *could* do a bicubic smoothing on them, but that will only look marginally better:<br>
http://kjams.com/resources/bicubic_smooth.png<br>
Eventually I'll turn on smoothing but right now it's a performance loss for many people, that is why it is off by default.