Scaling images to 720x480 , any advantages ?

Good morning
I have been toying with my still image sizes for FCE this morning, I notice when I have an image size of say 720 X 540 my pixel aspect is square, however when I scale the image to 720 X 480 it becomes a
pixel aspect NTSC CCIR 601, what are the advantages of having the later of NTCS CCIR 601 ?
Thanks
Message was edited by: JustCallMe Dude

I have done a lot of work with Javascript and images in PDF forms and I have never found a way to do what you suggest.

Similar Messages

Scaled image doesn't appear

Hi, can someone tell me why the scaling of the image does not work in the code below.
I making a board game application with these inherited JLabel components used to display each players piece on a background created using an inherited JPanel. The image is correctly displayed on the JPanel at the correct location.
The problem I'm encountering is that when I attempt to scale the image used the scaledInstance method it doesn't appear on the board but appears perfectly if I use the default image (comment out the scaled instance part of the line).
I've tried downscaling as well increasing size, in case the image is too large and putting absolute values in but to no avail.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
package UserInterface;
import java.awt.*;
import javax.swing.*;
public class PieceIcon extends JLabel
    //Create new image with the piece (symbol) chosen by the player
    public PieceIcon(String symbol,int pNum)
        playerNumber = pNum;
     pieceImage = new ImageIcon("./Images/"+symbol+".jpg").getImage().getScaledInstance(10,10,Image.SCALE_DEFAULT);
        // above line works if scaled instance part removed, even though scaled image smaller
        setOpaque(false);
    public void paintComponent(Graphics g)
       super.paintComponent(g);
       g.drawImage(pieceImage,boardPos[0][(MainFrame.getPlayer(playerNumber).getCurrentBoardPos())],
                              boardPos[1][(MainFrame.getPlayer(playerNumber).getCurrentBoardPos())],this);
    private Image pieceImage;
    private int playerNumber;
    private static int[][] boardPos = (set of relative positions here, not displayed to make post easier to read)

bump

Black background when scaling images with transparent background

I am implementing Zooming functionality for reports which have some icons. I am trying to scale icon by scaling its image. But the problem I am facing is that the icons have transparent background and the scaling puts a black background in place of transparent. Is there any way to maintain its transparency or better yet, Is there anyway to put a white backgound instead of the black one that is created by default ? Here is my code
     public static Icon getScaledIcon(Icon icon){
         if(icon instanceof ImageIcon){
              Image outImage = ((ImageIcon)icon).getImage();
                  return new ImageIcon(getScaledImage(outImage));
         }else{
              Image outImage = new BufferedImage(icon.getIconWidth(),
                        icon.getIconHeight(),
                        BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_ARGB);
                JComponent comp = new JComponent(){};
                icon.paintIcon(comp, outImage.getGraphics(), 0, 0);
                return new ImageIcon(getScaledImage(outImage));
    public static Image getScaledImage(Image image){
         image = image.getScaledInstance((int)(image.getWidth(null) * getScale()),
                       (int)(image.getHeight(null) * getScale()), Image.SCALE_SMOOTH);
        return image;
    }I haven't done much image manipulation , so I would really appreciate any help or advice.

I have also not done much of image work. But I guess you could achieve your functionality of showing scaled image in the screen by not scaling the image and show it, instead scale the image in paint method by calling g.drawImage giving the height and width. But use high resolution images so that scaling is good.
If you do in this manner, you could give any colour you want as background to fill the transparent area or leave it as such.
Regards,
techece.

Is this a way of scaling images?

Hi,
I've got a few questions regarding image scaling and need some advices on whether my method is correct or to throw away as quickly as possible...
I've defined all my website images in "ems" so that they rescale when the user zooms in/out the page or decreases/increases the font. I thought this would be good for accessibility purposes (?).
There are 2 tedious things with that system:
1. the image dimensions must be computed in ems,
2. the image dimensions depend on the text font size used on the page.
If I change the page font size but want to keep my images as they were previously displayed, I need to go through these calculations again. It very quickly gets seriously annoying.
I found one way of avoiding this: I define font-size:1px for each image. The great thing is that since I have body {font-size:100%}, it turns out that when the image has font-size:1px, then its dimensions are the same in pixels or ems. I mean that if I want to display my image with width:50px and height:10px, then I just need to specify width:50em and height:10em. Or at least the result is close enough not to be seen different to the naked eye. This only is useful if I am not modifying too much the page font size, e.g. font-size:0.95em to font-size:1.05em. So I thought this is great! But... there always are associated problems.
Problems found so far:
1. This only works if applied to the image, not its container (e.g. a floating div), so that the font-size doesn't propagate to any child element, e.g. a caption below the image.
2. If the image is inside a div that is floated, then I need to set a width for that div and this width needs to be calculated with respect to the normal page font size, not my 1px—if this makes sense. If I were to change my image dimension, then I'd need to change this width too.
3. It works fine with IE and Firefox, but no Safari and Opera.
Hence the following questions:
- Is this method totally absurd (as it probably sounds after my description) and/or infringing some basic rules?
- Is there anything simpler?
- Why doesn't it work in Safari or Opera?
I'd be very grateful for any comment on this. Having started HTML and CSS only 1.5 month ago and not full time, I have no feeling at this stage whether this is a correct or acceptable way of thinking or not...
Emilie

- Is this method totally absurd
Yes. Scaling images is very easy. Unless all your images are the same width, you will need to create an attribute selector for each image, but the principle is the same for each one.
Let's say you have an image called mypic01.jpg, which is 600px wide.
Remove the width and height attributes from the <img> tag. This displays the image at its normal size.
Create the following style rule:
img[src$="mypic01.jpg"] {
width:50%;
max-width:600px;
This makes the image 50% of the size of its parent element, but ensures that it never grows bigger than its maximum size. Just use the image name in place of "mypic01.jpg", and adjust the correct value for max-width.
The only drawback is that this won't be supported by IE6, which will simply display the image at its normal size. If it's important to support IE6, change from an atttribute selector to an ID selector like this:
#mypic01 {
width:50%;
max-width:600px;
Add the ID to the <img> tag:
<img src="mypic01.jpg" alt="my scaling image" id="mypic01" />
IE6 will ignore the maximum width, but will scale the image to 50% of the size of the parent element.

TIFF SCALED IMAGE QUALITY

HI,
I am scaling a scanned image to fit into my application screen.
But the scaled image quality is very bad.
I am using the following code to scale the image.
PlanarImage im0 = JAI.create("url", new URL (sURL));
Interpolation interp = Interpolation.getInstanceInterpolation.INTERP_BICUBIC);
ParameterBlock params = new ParameterBlock();
     params.addSource(im0);
     params.add(0.4F); // x scale factor
     params.add(0.4F); // y scale factor
     params.add(0.0F); // x translate
     params.add(0.0F); // y translate
     params.add(interp); // interpolation method
/*Create an operator to scale image1. */
JAI xx = JAI.getDefaultInstance();
Map hints = new HashMap();
hints.put(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING,RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY);
hints.put(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING,RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON);
RenderedImage image2 = xx.createNS("scale", params,new RenderingHints(hints));
ANy idea helpful,
Thanks,
Ram

If you need to scale down your image from a factor smaller than 0.5, do the reduction twice, using factors that when multiplied give 0.4. For example, first reduce it using 0.8 then reduce the result using 0.5.
Weird, but should work. I've heard that reducing images in JAI with factors < 0.5 yield poor results.
Rafael

Can I delete all of the images in "All Images" without losing any originals?

Can I delete all of the images in "All Images" without losing any original photos? Thank you.

Simply: iPhoto is a database. Like all databases it requires that you manipulat the data via the tools provided and not through backdoors. If you delete matter managed by iPhoto (or for that matter, any database) through some other means then the database will be unaware of the deletions. The database will not reflect the changes and you'll have significant issues going forward with iPhoto.
So, to be really, really clear: if you delete Photos managed by iPhoto via the All Images search you will corrupt your Library.
It's your computer, your images and your iPhoto. You have the information, you decide how to use it.
Regards
TD

Any advantage in working in ProRes 422 start to finish

Since it's possible to capture ProRes 422 via firewire now is there any advantage to working with it from start to finish? The workflow now has been capture and work in HDV and render to a ProRes Timeline when finished.
I'd Like to hear some opinions on this subject. I know ProRess captured files are much larger than HDV captures so that's a consideration.
Also Does ProRes run any smoother in FCP2 than HDV?

I'm sure there are others, but two things come to mind right away:
Since ProRes422 is 10-bit, it makes working in Color much more liberating.
As best I can tell, rendering in in FCP is much quicker (even at the highest quality settings) with ProRes422 on a Mac Pro since it's a much more multi-thread friendly codec than HDV.

Scaling image files for Slide presentation in Keynote

I have had great problems importing and scaling images for Keynote presentations with approx 500+ images. Having tried to adjust the image to fit the full screen the scaling results in unacceptable pixelation. I seem to have solved this now by batch processing my image files and saving them as PDF files. These are then imported from the Aperture Library as iPhoto wont recognise the PDF file format!
It's a pity that Keynote has so many restrictions for use in Slide/music presentations, having seen incredible professional results with Pic2exe (which unfortunately at present is not available in Mac format - tho the Win exe file will run I am told).

Please tell us what you are really trying to do!!
You know like dumb stuff like where are the images from? What's their resolution? If you';re using Aperture you can't be a newbie.
You can achieve incredible professional results in Keynote, but you need to know how it wants to work.
Kelly is right. This is not just a ***** session but a place to get real help from real people.
Silly things like Image Placeholders will make your life much simpler. etc.

I'm buying a new computer for use with Creative Cloud. Are there any advantages to PC vs Mac?

I'm replacing a seven year old Dell that still works but is getting rather long in the tooth. I have CS4 web design. (For PC)
I have a Macbook Pro (so I'm familar with Mac OS)
I'm upgrading my computer to mainly use the Creative Cloud.
Are there any advantages (related to Creative Cloud) to buying a Mac or a PC?
I just don;t wan't to a Mac and then find that many features don;t work that are on the PC (or vice versa)
Or is one interface easier to use than another?
Thanks in advance for any help.

It usually boils down to personal preference.
The software is, to all intents and purposes, the same in either operating system. There are minor differences between them, usually related to the hardware or the operating system. But if you can use the software in Windows, you'll be able to use it on a Mac too.
It's a matter of which environment you prefer: Windows or Mac. I use both daily since the Cloud allows you to install on Windows and/or Mac.

Any advantages to older ipod photo except capacity?

I'm thinking of buying the ipod color 20 gb--that's probably plenty of capacity for me, but I'm wondering, aside from the smaller hard drive, are there any advantages to the 20 vs. the 30 or to the 30 vs. the 20? Is the 30 less prone to scratching, for example? Are there any new features that the 20 has and the 30 lacks?
In other words, is the extra money for the 30 gb ipod photo just buying me more hard drive?

yes - the only advantage is more HDD space. I myself have the 20 gig but for the extra 50 bucks u get 10 gigs more when u compare...

Is there any advantage in performing a clean install?

I'm curious... My 80GB internal hard drive is nearly full so I will be upgrading to a 250GB.
Is there any advantage in performing a clean install of Tiger on the new HDD and then copying across files etc from the old one using migration tool? (the idea being it will cleanse any old files, code from the numerous OS upgrades as it originally had panther on)
Or will the system be just as fast by using the disk utility to copy the contents (OSX and all) of the 80 GB across to the new 250GB and then set that as the boot drive?

If you are asking if there is an advantage to doing an erase and install, then yes, you'll be able to ascertain any of the issues you've been having with Apple software are hardware related issues if before the migration assistant you have trouble with any Apple applications. Cloning one drive to another, you'll find yourself with whatever corrupted fonts, cache, preferences files you had before. I would though make a backup of your data to a second drive before attempting the move, simply because it is wise to have at least two copies of your data at all times.

Any advantage to having website hosted by a Mac OS X Server webhost?

With Leopard on it's way and the likes of iChat Server supporting relaying, is there any advantage to having our domain hosted with a Mac OS X Server webhost? For instance would we then be able to use iChat Server with our domain name?
I'm thinking about putting a little pressure on our webhost to provide Mac OS X services.

I'm no expert on web hosting (or anything else to do with web services but I would have thought that the only way to take advantage of all the Leopard stuff would be to lease a whole machine to yourself (or get them to host your own machine). I cannot see how a hosting company could use a single server for multiple customers, thereby reduce hosting cost per customer.
-david

Any advantage to dojng an A & I with retail Leopard vs. Upgrade Leopard?

My Intel iMac came installed w/ Tiger and a "CPU Drop-In" DVD of Leopard. I need to do an Archive and Install to see if I can fix a hanging Finder. I previously bought a retail copy of Leopard for my G5, which I understand will install on either PPC or an Intel machine. Is there any advantage to using the retail version on my Intel iMac? I've read that the CPU Drop-In Leopard is not a complete version of Leopard, which doesn't make sense to me.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Message was edited by: WildBill

a brody,
Thanks for posting and your offer to advise.
As for a backup, I have most of my data still on the G5. I've already done an A&I on the Intel iMac once witch did not fix the Finder issue. In getting ready to give an A&I another go, I backed up my Intel last night to an Ext. HD using CCC. There are three users on the machine. The other two users are not experiencing the Finder issue.
Background on why I did an A&I in the first place: ran my newly acquired updated version of DiskWarrior on the Intel iMac. Turns out this version can build the directory but can not fix permissions because it's based on Tiger. I did not know this (wrongly assumed DW was entirely compatible with Leopard).
DW tech suggested I do an A&I which did not fix the problem. An Apple tech yesterday suggested that since the Finder is only hanging on my (admin) desktop, that I create a new admin account and drag over my files either by using target Mode with G5 or getting them from the Ext. HD. However, I thought that maybe if I do another A&I, it might fix the problem. I'm also concerned that even though the other users on the Intel do not have the hanging Finder, that the previous ?A&I might not have corrected all the corrupted permissions.
BTW, initially the Apple tech guy suggested that I do a complete Erase and Install, but in thinking further on it, thought just creating another admin account would be sufficient.
What do you think?
Message was edited by: WildBill

Any advantages to setting the AP-Manager and Management interface to an untagged vlan?

Any advantages to setting the AP-Manager and Management interface to an untagged vlan? Currently, our controllers have their management and ap-manager interfaces on the same untagged vlan. Would it be wise to change this? Are there any gotchyas I should be aware of?

No really, there won't be a problem. Management an AP-manager can be on different vlans.
The vlan you chose to untag is the vlan you should declare as native on the switch, that's it.
No advantage in having interfaces configured in a way or another.
Some people want the management to be in a "management" subnet and the ap-manager will be in the subnet with all the APs. Some others have several AP subnets so the ap-manager is in the same as management ... no importance whatsoever as long as the config is coherent.
The only thing that is worth considering is the size of AP subnet to me. If you give a /16 for APs and have 1000 APs in a single subnet, ARP and broadcast storms will be hitting the fan. But the vlan tag/untags that you chose are not important
To rate an answer, click on the stars below it. 1 for not so useful and 5 for very useful.
Nicolas
===
Don't forget to rate answers that you find useful.

Any advantages to using .mac vs. AIM account?

I have both a .mac account and an AIM account. Currently I use my AIM account almost exclusively for iChat, and I was just wondering if there are any advantages to using my .mac over the free AIM.
Also if friends of mine wanted to add my .mac name to their AIM what information would I give them? just [email protected]?

hi Sup909,
Encryption. Mac to Mac with both having @mac names
Otherwise, No.
9:15 PM Saturday; December 2, 2006

Scaling images to 720x480 , any advantages ?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for