Textures problem in XP?

[ZX12eR]

Is anyone else having this difficulty---and if so, is there a cure: I began to notice difficulties with applying textures when I changed to XP Pro. Unfortunately I changed to PS7 (patched to 7.01) at the same time, so I'm not sure of the cause. I'm using a Matrox Pahelia 256 card, but had the same problem using the G400. The problem is that the graphix become fuzzy to view at anything but 50%, 100%, 200%. So much so that they are almost impossible to work with. I have a good monitor (22" Diamond Pro Mitsu.) The funny thing is I have another box with WIN2k which displays textures just fine (i.e., filter>texture>texturizer) at any ratio. When I swap cards, I still have the same problem on the XP Pro box.
So, I think the problem is XP Pro...
Any ideas, similar experiences, advice?
Thanks in advance!
ZX12eR

[Colin Walls]

Only a comment:
You should always aim to view images at the "standard" magnifications. Only these will show the true image - everything else is resampled and is, hence, an approximation.

[Thee_DarkOverLord]

view images at the "standard" magnifications




=100%

[Bill Lamp]

Thee,

Until I find a monitor/video card that will display a picture in Photoshop with the picture taking up over 4,000 pixels of the width, I'm going to have to settle for using a smaller magnification for overall look judgement and reserve 100% for "spot checks". I don't even want to think what that might cost.

Bill, who ALSO doesn't want to think what it would cost to be able to view (ON the screen) a 4 x 5 inch negative scanned at 2100x2100 DPI.

[Colin Walls]

Thee:

Although 100% is ideal, exact sub-multiples [50%, 33%, 25%] are reasonable, as the resampling is trivial. It's the "odd" magnifcations that cause problems.

[dave milbut]

I agree w/everything said, but still, viewing at other percentages shouldn't mean:

So much so that they are almost impossible to work with.




something's wrong.

zx12er, can you post a link to a screen shot? have you tried turning down video hardware acceleration? are your vid drivers signed? is your desktop set to a "standard" resolution like 800x600, 1280x1024, etc.? is that monitor an lcd or crt?

[Phosphor]

"...exact sub-multiples [50%, 33%, 25%] are reasonable..."




no, No, NO!

You almost got that right, Colin.

Divisors that are EVEN numbers are OK, like 2, 4, 6, 8, etc (for 50%, 25%, 16.67%, 12.5%, respectively). The best of those are the divisors that contain no odd factors (like the 100%/6....the 6 has an odd factor of 3, and it results in an odd magnification percentage: 16.666666666666666666......).

[Colin Walls]

Surely:
50% means zap every other pixel
25% means lose 3, keep 1
33% means lose 2, keep 1

Can't see why the last one is worse.

Surely the problem comes when it doesn't divide, so the loss of pixels is not evenly distributed.

Please explain where I'm going wrong Uncle Phos.

[Carl B. Johnson]

1/3 cannot be divided into 100 and give you a whole integer.. it can
never resolve... 1/3 is
33.33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 333333333333
well, you get the idea

[dave milbut]

thanks for breaking my margins. rrrrr... :)

[dave milbut]

<G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G ><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G>< G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G> <G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G ><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G>< G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G> <G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G ><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G>< G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G> <G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G ><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G>< G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G><G>

[Colin Walls]

For 33%, let's read 33.3 recurring ...

[ZX12eR]

Hi,
I'm away from that box now so I can't post a screenshot, but I will say this, the same card, same PS version on my WIN2k box is fine...not perfect (I don't expect that), but fine...the problem is only on the XP box. I've never had this problem (to the extent that it was a problem anyway) before. I had better looking texture display (in some ways anyway) on WIN98, PS5 then I do on XP. I just thought some of you may have noticed this too. If not, apply a texture using the texturizer and see what it looks like on XP.
Thanks!
ZX12eR