View Single Post
Old 03-20-2013, 02:30 AM   #10
kovidgoyal
creator of calibre
kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.kovidgoyal ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
kovidgoyal's Avatar
 
Posts: 45,411
Karma: 27757236
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Mumbai, India
Device: Various
I've been thinking about this patch a bit, currently if an output profile is specified it both scales to the output profile size and lowers the image quality. Is that really necessary? Wouldn't a better algorithm be

1) Scale to the output profile size
2) Lower the image quality only enough to ensure that the image size is < original_area/factor rather than scaled_area/factor
kovidgoyal is offline   Reply With Quote