MyBB Community Forums

I use Google Chrome, but I also view my website in other browsers to see if anything is "out of whack".

I always felt like Chrome had better text details, but I also wonder if its just my mind playing tricks on me.

Then I put in a "avatar" row on the threadlist display, and noticed that Chrome has so much better details on re-sized avatars. Now, to be fair some of the avatars are pretty large (300x300px max), so re-sizing them to 38x38 on the threadlist is probably making them look so crappy in IE and Firefox 5.0.1 - but how does Chrome manage to make them look so good?

Snapshots I took / uploaded to imageshack so keep in mind that the pictures are further degraded.

Firefox 5.0.1
Thread List
Thread

In Firefox, only the avatars that are small to begin with (the red avatar) look right in the threadlist.

IE 9
Thread List
Thread

In IE, none of the re-sized avatars look smooth on the threadlist.

Chrome 13.0.782.107
Thread List
Thread

In Chrome, EVERY avatar looks good. Even the re-sized 300x300 pixel snake.

Sorry for this post . I guess I will have to scale down on the max avatar dimension sizes.

Not sure, maybe chrome performs a quick software Anti-Alias on them

They're just blurred out a bit, not necessarily better though.

(2011-08-07, 10:30 PM)Scoutie44 Wrote: [ -> ]They're just blurred out a bit, not necessarily better though.

Not sure what you mean. Chrome browser (left) looks better on my side of the monitor. Now for granted, scaling a 300x300 pixel avatar is a bit rough.

I'd have to see the original images to be sure but my guess would be that IE & FF are using "Nearest Neighbor" scaling (very cheap computationally, just pick a pixel and use that) versus Chrome using possibly Bilinear or Bicubic (more expensive, average the dropped pixels together to get the final color). Note that those algorithm explanations are extremely simplified. Playing around by rescaling in PS/GIMP should give you an idea as to which they're using.

The one on the left is blurred a bit whereas the one on the right isn't; as Tom mentioned it uses a different method of rescaling, that's all. If you want to maximize resized quality and consistency you'd have to use a script for PHP or something to do it server-side, creating the different sizes you need, but of course that increases the load on your server unnecessarily.

I do see what you mean though, Chrome does look better for scaled images. Text, on the other hand, I can't say I agree.. (see attached, top is ff, bottom is chrome).

Anyways, as you say, trying to scale them down to 10% of the original size is a bit of a challenge regardless. I would go with a server-side resizer if it's really important to you, though.

You forgot about Opera, the most superior of all.

Opera is meh, Chrome is still the best for resizing.

I prefer Opera for it's interface, and it's engine. Going back a page in Chrome reloads the page again, in Opera it's displayed instantly as it was. Also for it's built in mail.

Swell.

I used my site with Opera (just downloaded). Opera looks to take the same affect as FF and IE9. I've lowered the 'max avatar dimension' size, so now it adequately looks fine.

Still flattered how much different the scaled avatars look in Chrome