| Welcome to The Gang of Five | The Land Before Time. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Working On New Project; LBT Backgrounds | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 16 2009, 03:03:47 AM (237 Views) | |
| landbeforetimelover | Jul 16 2009, 03:03:47 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Littlefoot
|
I know I've put up LBT backgrounds in the past, but I've come up with a MUCH simpler and faster system now and I plan to take and post more images than I had before. The most significant thing I've discovered is that Windows actually does smoothly resize a background image. I didn't think it was that good before....maybe it's changed. Whatever the case, I can take a DVD snapshot at DVD's native resolution (720x480) and it will look virtually identical to a large DVD snapshot image taken at 1920x1050 when stretched along the desktop background. Because of this I can now increase speeds of the preloading sequence and also decrease filesize. Instead of having a 1024k image I can have a 240k image and they'll look virtually identical in quality when applied as a desktop background. This will increase website speed, decrease download time, increase your computer speed, and decrease the amount of space the image takes up on my server and your hard drive. It's all pluses and I can find no negatives to this compromise. You may take a look at the new system and have a preview of it by visiting the LBT background page on my website: http://www.freewebs.com/landbeforetimelove...backgrounds.htm |
![]() |
|
| Alex | Jul 16 2009, 03:27:45 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Look up for assorted pro-Ducky avatars.
|
Awesome ![]() I'll be waiting for a Ducky-themed one. |
![]() |
|
| Petrie. | Jul 16 2009, 07:32:42 AM Post #3 |
![]()
GOF Founder
![]()
|
Certainly is useful to know. Maybe the smoothing thing is only for Vista or 7. I really don't think this occurs in XP.
|
![]() |
|
| landbeforetimelover | Jul 16 2009, 03:05:38 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Littlefoot
|
The stretch attribute has remained the same since Windows 95. I have no way of testing it on a Windows 95 computer but the smooth resize should work on any modern OS. Think of it this way. If you take a large image snapshot of a DVD and a DVD's maximum resolution is smaller, then you've just stretched the image and increased the image's size. So why not let the OS stretch the image instead? I didn't think it stretched the image very well (sort of like how images become blurred when automatically resized by this board), but I've done pixel by pixel quality comparison and in some cases they're even better than when you stretch them in Photoshop.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Computer and Electronics · Next Topic » |











7:37 PM Jul 10