Horizontal zoom level = missing peak data.

AA is completly misrepresenting wavform peak data here imo, at first glance the waveform below AA clearly shows the wave has no peak data over 0-db
Further zooming shows there is still no peak data above 0-db.
Applying slightly more horizontal zoom and suddenly huge peaks way over 0-db start to appear.
These peaks should have been clearly shown in the top picture but they weren't, why mislead peaople like this? This is completly misleading, and before anyone says those peaks are too small to be displayed at the fully zoomed out waveform view, look again at the first screen shot, the peaks are all there and visiable, they're simply being truncated by AA to 0-db (for no apparent reason.) This is rediculous, because it's rediculouse to make an app that misrepresents peak data like this, if you'r going to show the whole waveform, then show it.
This has wasted about a day of my time so far, many of my files have also been discarded as they didn't appear to contain the correct peak data, viewing them appeared to show that they were all clipped, now it turns out they were not.
It's easy to asume these files are clipped, when infact they are not.

There is actually a software problem here, and all this unpleasantness has prevented everyone from actually looking at the problem. Ni-cad's newness to the software is beside the point. There is a problem and it should be reported as a bug.
To the best of my knowledge, any 32-bit float file containing above-zero peaks is NEVER displayed correctly in any version of Audition or CEP when any significant length is displayed on the time axis. Ni-Cad's pictures correctly show this -- zoomed out on the amplitude axis, the waveforms look flat-topped, as though the file had been saved as 24-bit integer instead of a float. The 32-bit over-zero peaks only become visible when the time axis selection is relatively small. In AA3.01 they jump into view with the time selection is between 26 and 27 seconds or less on a 100 second file, and when less than 106 seconds is visible on a file of 1000 seconds of length (16:40).
Perhaps .pk files are unable to save waveform image data above zero, and the view is correct only when zoomed in far enough to be using direct data instead of the peak file. If so, they must have been designed for ProTools!

Similar Messages

Indexes on Oracle Level Missing at Data Dic. (SAP) Level

Hello Masters,.
My Question is, There are 3 standard tables in CRM server Say for example table A, table B, table C.
Table A has 2 index , B have 1 Index, C has 2 Index in Database level.
These Indexes are not available or somehow deleted from Data Dictionary (SAP) level.
Are these Indexes working if i am writing ABAP Code Select statement or in any situitions...??

The one way that I can see to find that out quickly is to do a trace on a query performed against the table(s)... through ST05 and then drilling down into the Execution Plan in the Trace List..
Those indexes that are being used will be listed there.
Your queries will need to encourage use of these indexes, though, to avoid false negatives...
Regards,
Dushyant Shetty

Zoom level not works on horizontal orientation

Hi, i've this issue : when i set crystalReporViewer.zoom(2) on a report with horizontal orientation, zoom not works. If i set vertically orientation, my zoom level is applied.
Thanks !

Hi Paulo,
It's not clear in the steps you are using. Are you setting the zoom level first before previewing or setting the zoom after previewing?
First post you said you were setting zoom to level 2, now you say you are setting zoom to level 300????
And Horizontal is Landscape and vertical is Portrait correct?
If you set the Zoom to 300 % you will have to scroll across, horizontal bar should be enabled.
If I set it to 1 then it fits the width:
This is a landscape report.
Don

IE Browser zoom level problem (Avoid missing Left/Top portion)

When the user set the zoom level in Internet explorer to 125 or 150, there are some missing portions (left and top) of my flash object.
Is there any way to avoid this ??? or at least forcing the display of the Left and top side
For some reason I have lost almost all the day on this with no luck so far
Thanks

Many hours later and the only fix I can do is to "hack" the scaleX/Y to force zoom to 1:0 ...this way to content is not affected by the browser zoom level.
Any better solution to prevent my flash to be incomplete (left/top) when the user use the browser zoom feature??

Missing zoom level?

Having upgraded from Firefox 3 to Firefox 8 I am having trouble getting the same zoom levels as before. I used to make the text one level smaller than the default, but when I do that in Firefox 8 it is the same as when I made it two levels smaller in Firefox 3. Does anyone know if the levels have changed? Any way to get that in between zoom level again?

I can't check back to 3.6.* this is what is current and you can
change the values to something else in your about:config
toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues default string .3,.5,.67,.8,.9,1,1.1,1.2,1.33,1.5,1.7,2,2.4,3
see
* http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config_entries
* http://kb.mozillazine.org/Toolkit.zoomManager.zoomValues

CS4 NOT capable of sharp displays at all zoom levels

I must have been asleep, until now, and missed the significance and importance of what follows.
In post #11 here:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/375478?tstart=30
on 19 March 2009 Chris Cox (Adobe Photoshop Engineer - his title on the old forums) said this, in a discussion regarding sharpness in CS4:
"You can't have perfectly sharp images at all zoom levels.". Unfortunately, my experience with CS4 since its release late last year has repeatedly confirmed the correctness of this statement.
What makes this statement so disturbing is that it contradicts an overwhelming amount of the pre- and post-release promotional advertising of CS4 by Adobe, to the effect that the OpenGL features of CS4 enable it to display sharp images at all zoom levels and magnifications. What is surprising is that this assertion has been picked up and regurgitated in commentary by other, sometimes highly experienced, Ps users (some unconnected with, but also some directly connected with, Adobe). I relied upon these representations when making my decision to purchase the upgrade from CS3 to CS4. In fact, they were my principal reason for upgrading. Without them, I would not have upgraded. Set out in numbered paragraphs 1 to 6 below is a small selection only of this material.
1. Watch the video "Photoshop CS4: Buy or Die" by Deke McClelland (inducted into the Photoshop Hall of Fame, according to his bio) on the new features of CS4 in a pre-release commentary to be found here:
http://fyi.oreilly.com/2008/09/new-dekepod-deke-mcclelland-on.html
Notice what he says about zooming with Open GL: "every zoom level is a bicubically rendered thing of beauty". That, when viewed with the zooming demonstrated, can only be meant to convey that your image will be "sharp" at all zoom levels. I'm sure he believes it too - Deke is someone who is noted for his outspoken criticism of Photoshop when he believes it to be deserved. It would seem that he must not have experimented and tested to the extent that others posting in this forum have done so.
2. Here's another Adobe TV video from Deke McClelland:
http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f1584v1021
In this video Deke discusses the "super smooth" and "very smooth" zooming of CS4 at all zoom levels achieved through the use of OpenGL. From the context of his comments about zooming to odd zoom levels like 33.33% and 52.37%, it is beyond doubt that Deke's use of the word "smooth" is intended to convey "sharp". At the conclusion of his discussion on this topic he says that, as a result of CS4's "smooth and accurate" as distinct from "choppy" (quoted words are his) rendering of images at odd zoom levels (example given in this instance was 46.67%), "I can actually soft proof sharpening as it will render for my output device".
3. In an article by Philip Andrews at photoshopsupport.com entitled 'What's New In Adobe Photoshop CS4 - Photoshop 11 - An overview of all the new features in Adobe Photoshop CS4',
see: http://www.photoshopsupport.com/photoshop-cs4/what-is-new-in-photoshop-cs4.html
under the heading 'GPU powered display', this text appears :
"Smooth Accurate Pan and Zoom functions – Unlike previous versions where certain magnification values produced less than optimal previews on screen, CS4 always presents your image crisply and accurately. Yes, this is irrespective of zoom and rotation settings and available right up to pixel level (3200%)." Now, it would be a brave soul indeed who might try to argue that "crisply and accurately" means anything other than "sharply", and certainly, not even by the wildest stretch of the imagination, could it be taken to mean "slightly blurry but smooth" - to use the further words of Chris Cox also contained in his post #11 mentioned in the initial link at the beginning of this post.
4. PhotoshopCAFE has several videos on the new features of CS4. One by Chris Smith here:
http://www.photoshopcafe.com/cs4/vid/CS4Video.htm
is entitled 'GPU Viewing Options". In it, Chris says, whilst demonstrating zooming an image of a guitar: "as I zoom out or as I zoom in, notice that it looks sharp at any resolution. It used to be in Photoshop we had to be at 25, 50 , 75 (he's wrong about 75) % to get the nice sharp preview but now it shows in every magnification".
5. Here's another statement about the sharpness of CS4 at odd zoom levels like 33.33%, but inferentially at all zoom levels. It occurs in an Adobe TV video (under the heading 'GPU Accererated Features', starting at 2 min 30 secs into the video) and is made by no less than Bryan O'Neil Hughes, Product Manager on the Photoshop team, found here:
http://tv.adobe.com/#vi+f1556v1686
After demonstrating zooming in and out of a bunch of documents on a desk, commenting about the type in the documents which is readily visible, he says : "everything is nice and clean and sharp".
6. Finally, consider the Ps CS4 pdf Help file itself (both the original released with 11.0 and the revised edition dated 30 March 2009 following upon the release of the 11.0.1 update). Under the heading 'Smoother panning and zooming' on page 5, it has this to say: "Gracefully navigate to any area of an image with smoother panning and zooming. Maintain clarity as you zoom to invididual pixels, and easily edit at the highest magnification with the new Pixel Grid." The use of the word "clarity" can only mean "sharpness" in this context. Additionally, the link towards the top of page 28 of the Help file (topic of Rotate View Tool) takes you to yet another video by Deke McClelland. Remember, this is Adobe itself telling you to watch this video. 5 minutes and 40 seconds into the video he says: "Every single zoom level is fluid and smooth, meaning that Photoshop displays all pixels properly in all views which ensures more accurate still, video and 3D images as well as better painting, text and shapes.". Not much doubt that he is here talking about sharpness.
So, as you may have concluded, I'm pretty upset about this situation. I have participated in another forum (which raised the lack of sharp rendering by CS4 on several occasions) trying to work with Adobe to overcome what I initially thought may have been only a problem with my aging (but nevertheless, just-complying) system or outdated drivers. But that exercise did not result in any sharpness issue fix, nor was one incorporated in the 11.0.1 update to CS4. And in this forum, I now read that quite a few, perhaps even many, others, with systems whose specifications not only match but well and truly exceed the minimum system requirements for OpenGL compliance with CS4, also continue to experience sharpness problems. It's no surprise, of course, given the admission we now have from Chris Cox. It seems that CS4 is incapable of producing the sharp displays at all zoom levels it was alleged to achieve. Furthermore, it is now abundently clear that, with respect to the issue of sharpness, it is irrelevant whether or not your system meets the advertised minimum OpenGL specifications required for CS4, because the OpenGl features of CS4 simply cannot produce the goods. What makes this state of affairs even more galling is that, unlike CS3 and earlier releases of Photoshop, CS4 with OpenGL activated does not even always produce sharp displays at 12.5, 25, and 50% magnifications (as one example only, see posts #4 and #13 in the initial link at the beginning of this post). It is no answer to say, and it is ridiculous to suggest (as some have done in this forum), that one should turn off OpenGL if one wishes to emulate the sharp display of images formerly available.

Thanks, Andrew, for bringing this up. I have seen comments and questions in different forums from several CS4 users who have had doubts about the new OpenGL display functionality and how it affects apparent sharpness at different zoom levels. I think part of the interest/doubt has been created by the over-the-top hype that has been associated with the feature as you documented very well.
I have been curious about it myself and honestly I didn't notice it at first but then as I read people's comments I looked a little closer and there is indeed a difference at different zoom levels. After studying the situation a bit, here are some preliminary conclusions (and I look forward to comments and corrections):
The "old", non-OpenGL way of display was using nearest-neighbor interpolation.
I am using observation to come to this conclusion, using comparison of images down-sampled with nearest-neighbor and comparing them to what I see in PS with OpenGL turned off. They look similar, if not the same.
The "new", OpenGL way of display is using bilinear interpolation.
I am using observation as well as some inference: The PS OpenGL preferences have an option to "force" bilinear interpolation because some graphics cards need to be told to force the use of shaders to perform the required interpolation. This infers that the interpolation is bilinear.
Nothing is truly "accurate" at less than 100%, regardless of the interpolation used.
Thomas Knoll, Jeff Schewe, and others have been telling us that for a long time, particularly as a reason for not showing sharpening at less than 100% in ACR (We still want it though ). It is just the nature of the beast of re-sampling an image from discrete pixels to discrete pixels.
The "rule of thumb" commonly used for the "old", non-OpenGL display method to use 25%, 50%, etc. for "accurate" display was not really accurate.
Those zoom percentages just turned out to be less bad than some of the other percentages and provided a way to achieve a sort of standard for comparing things. Example: "If my output sharpening looks like "this" at 50% then it will look close to "that" in the actual print.
The "new", OpenGL interpolation is certainly different and arguably better than the old interpolation method.
This is mainly because the more sophisticated interpolation prevents drop-outs that occurred from the old nearest-neighbor approach (see my grid samples below). With nearest-neighbor, certain details that fall into "bad" areas of the interpolated image will be eliminated. With bilinear, those details will still be visible but with less sharpness than other details. Accuracy with both the nearest-neighbor and bilinear interpolations will vary with zoom percentage and where the detail falls within the image.
Since the OpenGL interpolation is different, users may need to develop new "rules of thumb" for zoom percentages they prefer when making certain judgements about an image (sharpening, for example).
Note that anything below 100% is still not "accurate", just as it was not "accurate" before.
As Andrew pointed out, the hype around the new OpenGL bilinear interpolation went a little overboard in a few cases and has probably led to some incorrect expectations from users.
The reason that some users seem to notice the sharpness differences with different zooms using OpenGL and some do not (or are not bothered by it) I believe is related to the different ways that users are accustomed to using Photoshop and the resolution/size of their monitors.
Those people who regularly work with images with fine details (pine tree needles, for example) and/or fine/extreme levels of sharpening are going to see the differences more than people who don't. To some extent, I see this similar to people who battle with moire: they are going to have this problem more frequently if they regularly shoot screen doors and people in fine-lined shirts. Resolution of the monitor used may also be a factor. The size of the monitor in itself is not a factor directly but it may influence how the user uses the zoom and that may in turn have an impact on whether they notice the difference in sharpness or not. CRT vs LCD may also play a role in noticeability.
The notion that the new OpenGL/bilinear interpolation is sharp except at integer zoom percentages is incorrect.
I mention this because I have seen at last one thread implying this and an Adobe employee participated who seemed to back it up. I do not believe this is correct. There are some integer zoom percentages that will appear less sharp than others. It doesn't have anything to do with integers - it has to do with the interaction of the interpolation, the size of the detail, and how that detail falls into the new, interpolated pixel grid.
Overall conclusion:
The bilinear interpolation used in the new OpenGL display is better than the old, non-OpenGL nearest-neighbor method but it is not perfect. I suspect actually, that there is no "perfect" way of "accurately" producing discrete pixels at less than 100%. It is just a matter of using more sophisticated interpolation techniques as computer processing power allows and adapting higher-resolution displays as that technology allows. When I think about it, that appears to be just what Adobe is doing.
Some sample comparisons:
I am attaching some sample comparisons of nearest-neighbor and bilinear interpolation. One is of a simple grid made up of 1 pixel wide lines. The other is of an image of a squirrel. You might find them interesting. In particular, check out the following:
Make sure you are viewing the Jpegs at 100%, otherwise you are applying interpolation onto interpolation.
Notice how in the grid, a 50% down-sample using nearest-neighbor produces no grid at all!
Notice how the 66.67% drops out some lines altogether in the nearest-neighbor version and these same lines appear less sharp than others in the bilinear version.
Notice how nearest-neighbor favors sharp edges. It isn't accurate but it's sharp.
On the squirrel image, note how the image is generally more consistent between zooms for the bilinear versions. There are differences in sharpness though at different zoom percentages for bilinear, though. I just didn't include enough samples to show that clearly here. You can see this yourself by comparing results of zooms a few percentages apart.
Well, I hope that was somewhat helpful. Comments and corrections are welcomed.

Im looking for a replacement of "Default Zoom Level" addon.

Im looking for a replacement of "Default Zoom Level" addon. Why is this disabled in Firefox 5/6? Is there a similar addon or how can I set the default zoom?

Did you do a compatibility check?
That is required in cases where the extension has a maxVersion (in this case 4.0.*) set in the XPI file and the server has the correct compatibility data ([[https://versioncheck.addons.mozilla.org/update/VersionCheck.php?reqVersion=2&id={D9A7CBEC-DE1A-444f-A092-844461596C4D}&version=4.5&maxAppVersion=6.0&status=userEnabled&appID={ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}&appVersion=5.0&appOS=Windows&appABI=x86-msvc&locale=en-US&currentAppVersion=5.0&updateType=97 8.*]]).
From https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/default-fullzoom-level/<br />
Works with: Firefox 3.6 - 8.*

Default zoom level in ppt and pdf export- OBIEE 11.1.5

Hi All,
When I download my report in PPT format, the default zoom level is 34%, and similarly when downloaded to PDF the default zoom level is 64%. Is there an option to set the default zoom level to 100%, when exporting in any of the formats available.
Thanks !!
Rgds,
Shruti

I did see the export to excel links, but when the Analysis Pivot Table is exported to Excel, it's not an "Excel Pivot Table". It's a simple static excel spreadsheet.
If you export a Cross-tab worksheet in Discoverer, you will get:
– a base sheet which contains all the data in table format
– a sheet containing the pivot table
– a static sheet
It's the Pivot Table generated automatically by Discoverer that I am looking for in the Export from OBIEE Analysis.

Zoom level in WPF Application consuming Bing Maps Web Services

Hi,
I am having trouble in setting the zoom level for the map with 7 pushpins (P1 through P7). The map is centered with point P1. I want all the push pins to show on the map. I have set the zoom level as follows.
Zoom Level 15 - if the points (P2...P7) are within 1 mile from P1
Zoom Level 14 - if the points (P2...P7) are between 1.1 and 1.5 miles from P1
Zoom Level 10 - if the points (P2...P7) are > 1.5 miles from P1.
If there a better way (like autozoom) to do this?
Thanks.
Regards, Venkat

Rick,
I have attached the map generated using SOAP services.
I tried to generate the same map using REST services as follows.
http://dev.virtualearth.net/REST/v1/Imagery/Map/Road?mapSize=640,480&pp=36.150928,-83.439971;10;S&pp=36.171645820140839,-83.410888686776161;32;S1&pp=36.168693,-83.415779;32;S2&pp=36.185192,-83.435401;32;S3&pp=36.140907,-83.472549;23;L1&pp=36.174339,-83.425415;23;L2&pp=36.17805,-83.433433;23;L3&key=BingKey&format=jpeg
The REST services map looks like its zoomed in compared to the SOAP services map. However the road/street names are missing. Is there any way to get the road/street names in the REST services map like in the online bing maps? Please advise.
SOAP SERVICES MAP
REST SERVICES MAP
Regards, Venkat

Cropping to View or Cropping to Zoom Level

Just wondering if this is already an option and I just can't find it... I work with very large images, and having a television background, I am always looking for the Wide/Medium/Tight shots - for example, getting three different shots from the originals. When I am zooming in to make corrections or retouch, I find myself saying "Now THAT would make a GREAT image cropped exactly where it is". Instead of dragging out the Crop Tool and risk the image "moving" from the exact zoom level or view I have it at, is there a way to "CROP TO VIEW" or "CROP TO ZOOM LEVEL" with just one click that I am missing, or should this go to the Photoship Wish List? Thanks, all!

As far as I can tell that’s currently not possible, so unless someone else has more insight here you might want to post in the Feature Request Forum.
While the zoom-level is accessible for Scripting purposes the image’s position in the window is not (to the best of my knowledge).

Missing Image Data in CS6 screen

I'm am sporatically encountering missing image data when opened in the CS6 image screen. Missing data is displayed with transparency grid. The problem occurs opening an existing PSD or when launching CS6 from ACR. Reloading the image may or may not correct the problem. Occurs in both new images processed in CS6 or images originally processed in CS5. Problem occurs in both PSD images or Smart Objects. Also, when enlarging the image view an image that displayed properly at 33% may loose image data in the display at other percentages. It appears to be totally random. The image data is there, its just not displaying. Lost data is in a rectangular section probably 25% of the image.
Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit, 8GB system memory, all current patches
NVidia Gforce 220, 1GB memory, driver current as of March 13, 2012
Images from Canon CR2 files.
Open GL is enabled
16 Bit images, sRGB or Adobe RGB, standard color workspace is Adobe and Canon camera is also set for Adobe RGB
Canon EOS 20D, Canon EOS 5D Mark II
HP with Intel I5 core processor.

I encounter the same problem. I always open my images (TIFF format) from LR4. My findings are as follows:
- the first image opened in PS6b has always this problem. Blocs of data are randomly missing. Zooming in or out restores the image temporary.
- by changing the background layer to a simple layer by double clicking, the problem disappears. More images loaded afterwards, appear normal. Only the image that opens PS6b has the problem.
Windows 7 64 bit, 8 GB RAM
Nvidia Gforce 240 GT 1 gig RAM with latest drivers
As my drivers are current and as everything else in my PS6b workflow works nice and smooth, I suspect "the Cat" and the trial screen to be the culprit.
jos

CS5 - Crop to View or Crop to Zoom Level?

Just wondering if this is already an option and I just can't find it... I work with very large images, and having a television background, I am always looking for the Wide/Medium/Tight shots - for example, getting three different shots from the originals. When I am zooming in to make corrections or retouch, I find myself saying "Now THAT would make a GREAT image cropped exactly where it is". Instead of dragging out the Crop Tool and risk the image "moving" from the exact zoom level or view I have it at, is there a way to "CROP TO VIEW" or "CROP TO ZOOM LEVEL" with just one click that I am missing, or should this go to the Photoship Wish List? Thanks, all!

As far as I can tell that’s currently not possible, so unless someone else has more insight here you might want to post in the Feature Request Forum.
While the zoom-level is accessible for Scripting purposes the image’s position in the window is not (to the best of my knowledge).

BaseMap zoom level bug?

Hi guys,
i noticed a weird behaviour of mapviewer if you construct your own base maps from geometries.
it all ends with the error:
"foi width value is wrong"
then the memory runs full and i have to kill the browser.
then i looked into my base map / tile layers and i think i found the cause of the problem:
<zoom_levels levels="5" min_scale="8.0335569E7" max_scale="5.54424757E8" min_tile_width="120.0" min_tile_height="Infinity">
<zoom_level level="0" name="level0" description="" scale="5.54424757E8" tile_width="Infinity" tile_height="Infinity"/>
<zoom_level level="1" name="level1" description="" scale="3.42065228E8" tile_width="Infinity" tile_height="Infinity"/>
<zoom_level level="2" name="level2" description="" scale="2.11045085E8" tile_width="360.0" tile_height="252.0"/>
<zoom_level level="3" name="level3" description="" scale="1.30209166E8" tile_width="180.0" tile_height="126.0"/>
<zoom_level level="4" name="level4" description="" scale="8.0335569E7" tile_width="120.0" tile_height="84.0"/>
</zoom_levels>
note the "Infinity" in the first 2 levels. I figured this is the reason because when i start the map in 2nd zoom level everything works perfectly, but as soon as i go in 2nd or first level it just freezes up leaking memory all over again.
I'm not completely sure how this happened. i created a new tile from the base map automatically creating the zoom levels and getting the min/max values from the map (load from map).
now as it works i don't really need a solution but i wanted to ask if this is known and/or intended. maybe i missed something during creation.
regards,
jR
Edited by: jR-ora on 18.03.2010 07:22

Interesting... you should file the bug if you can reproduce it more than once. Hopefully they'll fix it soon. Not uncommong for Apple software to have bugs on only certain machines. Usually related to GPUs and things that all machines don't share in common.

Missing export data in R/3

Hi,
I haven't setup customs management (i.e. not setup for proforma transfers from ECC) to GTS.
However, I get a message when creating billing document in ECC that missing export data even though billing doc is saved.
Do I need to do any config in ECC foreign trade
ANy idea?
Thanks,

As now you using GTS for Foreign Trade acitivity you need not to maintain any detail under Foreign Trade Configuration in Feeder system.
You will be getting this message because of the incompletion log schema activated under "Incompleteness Schemas for Foreign Trade Data" (Control Foreign Trade Data in MM and SD Documents). Deactivate those schema .
Kind Regards,
Sameer

Safari on rMBP has 200% zoom level by default when viewing standalone images.

I have a MacBook Air 13" Mid 2010 and recently purchased a MacBook Pro with Retina Display 15" Mid 2012. I have updated Safari to 6.0 on both machines, but here comes the problem when I use Safari to view a standalone image on my rMBP.
Normally when I view a standalone image on Safari, the zoom level is 100% which means I see the actual pixeles of the image. Once you open an image in a new tab or a new window, if the dimensions of the image is bigger than the window, let's say 5000x4000, the dimensions of the image will be adjusted to fit within the window. And then the cursor becomes a tiny circle with the "+" sign inside (sorry for my poor description, I hope you can get it) which is the zoom icon, by clicking the image you zoom to the actual pixels of the image which shows 100% of the image.
However this works on my MBA but it doesn't on my rMBP as the zoom level is 200% by default. The following web pages are the ones where I found to have the same problem and they have better explanations:
http://notes.jayrobinson.org/post/25599469833/the-images-above-show-safari-5-2-w ith-page-zoom-on
https://twitter.com/jayrobinson/status/214443964516937729
Sorry for the long post, but I just wonder if there is a way to fix the problem or if Apple can do it?

I've seen this reported before -- sometimes PSE needs to have the zoom set to even multiples of 25%. You can try searching Adobe's site to see if anyone has found a solution.
Ken

Horizontal zoom level = missing peak data.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for