Bicubic sampling is pretty good for up sampling an image and making it larger, but is it a good choice for down sampling as well? Are there better choices?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,899 times
11
-
1These two old articles from The Inner Product talk about filters for mipmap generation, which might be relevant to you: Link1, link2. – glampert Aug 06 '15 at 19:38
1 Answers
12
When Sean and I wrote stb_image_resize we chose Mitchell for downsizing. Mitchell is similar to Cubic, you can read about the cubic class of sampling filters in Mitchell Netravali 1988. They are all pretty similar and will get you very similar results.
I can't find any written record between Sean and I of why we decided to go with Mitchell, but if memory serves we just resampled a bunch of images and used the algorithm that we thought looked best. I wouldn't say that there is one authoritative or best filter, you should use the one that looks best on your data.
Edit: Like joojaa says, a windowed sinc filter is also good, if not quite as cheap. You can find some implementations here.
Jorge Rodriguez
- 366
- 3
- 4
-
3There is a authoritatively best filter, its a infinitely wide sinc filter. Its just not possible to use it. untill that time lanczos windowed sinc is a good alternative to michell – joojaa Aug 06 '15 at 15:38
-
-
If you are using a cubic-esque or lanczos filter, do those guys work equally well for scaling up as they do for scaling down? – Alan Wolfe Aug 06 '15 at 20:14
-
I've not tried lanczos so I can't speak to that. We chose catmull-rom for upscaling, which is a cubic, and it worked well. – Jorge Rodriguez Aug 07 '15 at 17:13