Working On New Project

landbeforetimelover · **on:** July 16, 2009, 04:03:47 AM

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 · **Reply #1 on:** July 16, 2009, 04:27:45 AM

Awesome

I'll be waiting for a Ducky-themed one.

Petrie. · **Reply #2 on:** July 16, 2009, 08:32:42 AM

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 · **Reply #3 on:** July 16, 2009, 04:05:38 PM

Quote

Certainly is useful to know. Maybe the smoothing thing is only for Vista or 7. I really don't think this occurs in XP. dino_tongue.gif

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.