Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[DragonDePlatino]

Have you considered adding support for the XBRZ algorithm?



HQX isn't meant to be used on pixel art. It's intended for resizing larger photos and such. On the other hand, XBRZ was created specifically for pixel art and works very well for it. Notice how when resizing to 4x, there are a lot of gray artifacts around HQX dwarf, but none on the XBRZ dwarf. There are also "stair-step" pixels on the HQX dwarf (look at the top of the arm) but none on the XBRZ dwarf. Also, when using using HQX, the algorithm won't smooth big blocks of color (eyes, mouth) while XBRZ will attempt to smooth those out a little bit. HQX even makes some really intelligent decisions, like bevelling the ends of the feet and turning the hands into perfect ovals.

The only downside to XBRZ is that I'm not sure if it supports alpha transparency...There's a MAME implementation of XBRZ out there and a Nintendo DS implementation with alpha transparency, but the standalone program (ScalerTest) I used to convert my example didn't support alpha transparency. Programming is an enigma to me so I wasn't able to look through the source code either.

[arclance]

Have you considered adding support for the XBRZ algorithm?

No because I have never heard of it.
That is probably because it was released after I wrote Tileset Resizer.

Please post your original and scaled comparisons as separate images so I can evaluate them.
I need your original unmodified image to evaluate before making any comparisons at all.

HQX isn't meant to be used on pixel art. It's intended for resizing larger photos and such.

You are wrong HQX is meant for scaling pixel art, it is terrible for photos.

hqx ("hq" stands for "high quality" and "x" stands for magnification) is one of the pixel art scaling algorithms developed by Maxim Stepin

The only downside to XBRZ is that I'm not sure if it supports alpha transparency.

HQX did not either when I started.
I have a workaround where you process the alpha layer separately and recombine them afterward if that is the case.

[DragonDePlatino]

Please post your original and scaled comparisons as separate images so I can evaluate them.
I need your original unmodified image to evaluate before making any comparisons at all.

Here's the original 24x24 dwarf:

If you take that image and run it through ScalerTest, you can compare HQX, BRX and BRXZ at 2x, 3x and 4x resolutions. There's also a bunch of sliders like Color Tolerance that let you tweak your results.

You are wrong HQX is meant for scaling pixel art, it is terrible for photos.

Well, I suppose you're right. I've just never been particularly fond of HQX when it's applied to pixel art.

HQX did not either when I started.
I have a workaround where you process the alpha layer separately and recombine them afterward if that is the case.

Hey, that's great! If you find out how to resize images with BRXZ with alpha transparency, is there any way you could release a standalone executable with that implemented for 2x? Or is that not possible because all of this is being done in Octave?

[arclance]

Hey, that's great! If you find out how to resize images with BRXZ with alpha transparency, is there any way you could release a standalone executable with that implemented for 2x? Or is that not possible because all of this is being done in Octave?

It is all done in Octave.
I don't know the language BRXZ is written in so I could not even try do anything to it.