Downsampling with ImageMagick

Good to know, thanks.

If interested in downsampling, check http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20992

You made me remember the old 4dos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4DOS

I pushed this through the resizing options in picture window pro (to 800* 1200) bicubic, nearest neighbor and Lanczos 8 by 8. The bicubic with 16 percent sharpening did not show the moire (any) that I got with photoshop. The Lanczos came out best, nearest neighbor worst of course.
Wonder what adobe is doing with their version of bicubic there?

Valant said:

I pushed this through the resizing options in picture window pro (to 800* 1200) bicubic, nearest neighbor and Lanczos 8 by 8. The bicubic with 16 percent sharpening did not show the moire (any) that I got with photoshop. The Lanczos came out best, nearest neighbor worst of course.
Wonder what adobe is doing with their version of bicubic there?

Click to expand...

I do not know, maybe because not much people complain...

Try the new version http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4686872/Pictus_resize_D.zip
I guess you will like the result.

This 2 images are also very good to test:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?rzm5jf4pq3i4ql7
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?uz8dphpj6q0y6n5

newmikey said:

I'm now used to Bash which is the *nix batch processor

Click to expand...

??? Bash is not a batch-processor, it's one of the available CLI-shells. See it as a desktop window to the command line... and sure it can process 'Shell scripts'. But these are more than just batch files like we are used to in DOS, they are real little programmable scripts with their own scripting language.

Since Windows is based on NT, it isn't 'build on DOS' anymore like earlier versions. DOS is an aged term, mostly we speak of the Windows Command line nowadays. It isn't used for 'disk operating system' anymore.

newmikey said:

with a bit more tricks up its sleeve than DOS (piping is one of the most useful)

Click to expand...

DOS (and the WCL) can and could do exactly the same... and it even uses the same syntax for it. It might be that you don't know DOS that well. But both Windows and Linux CLI can do very complex operations, that would take ages in a GUI.

Try, for example, to make a set of 3000 folders named A-000, B-000 and C-000 up till A-999, B-999 and C-999. in a CLI environment this takes only one command.
Or try copying a single file to multiple locations.

newmikey said:

but I applaud posts like this! CLI processing is certainly not outdated an can still be a very efficient way to process whole folders full of hundreds of images in recordtime.

Click to expand...

true. People that are into Linux often do have the advantage that they are more used to CLI-usage and see the strenghts of it

The latest/greatest BAT is being developed in
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=91754.0

Pictus said:

The latest/greatest BAT is being developed in
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=91754.0

Click to expand...

Thanks pictus, works like a charm! Great results and very easy with the bat file.