Page 1 of 1
EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T11:40:51-07:00
by NicolasRobidoux
It is my current opinion that the EWA LanczosSharpest should be named methods, in particular because the 4 lobe version is quite good with some type of content (not so the 3 lobe version).
Some of the evidence:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum ... #msg720827
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p ... ost1668680
Section 6.2.1 of Adam Turcotte's Masters thesis:
http://web.cs.laurentian.ca/nrobidoux/m ... Thesis.pdf
Re: EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T12:27:25-07:00
by fmw42
It is my current opinion that the EWA LanczosSharpest should be named methods
Could you clarify your statement? What do you mean by "named methods"?
Re: EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T12:44:52-07:00
by NicolasRobidoux
I meant that, for example, all you'd have to do is
Code: Select all
-define filter:lobes=4 -filter LanczosSharpest
to get what is currently obtained with
Code: Select all
-filter Lanczos -define filter:lobes=4 -define filter:blur=0.88451002338585141
.
Basically do with the LanczosSharpest (for which I'd need to spend time getting the blurs for every single one up to a large number of lobes) what was done with LanczosSharp.
Re: EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T12:49:45-07:00
by NicolasRobidoux
I can do most (all?) the work except documentation I think. I just need the key "OK".
Re: EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T13:06:19-07:00
by magick
Ok.
Re: EWA LanczosSharpest
Posted: 2014-03-23T13:17:24-07:00
by NicolasRobidoux
Thank you Cristy.
Probably will have to wait until I am on vacation. But it's on the TODO list.