Video width, height and scaling factor

[kodela]

What is the significance since the version Rincewind for following settings in Advanced Preferences for video:

- Video width
- Video height
- Video scaling factor

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

The same as always.

[kodela]

The same as always.

Then you look at these pictures please:


At 2.0.8 the width is correct: 500 x 0.50 = 250


At 2.0.8 the width is correct: 500 x 1.00 = 500


At 2.0.8 the width is correct: 500 x 1.00 = 500


At 2.0.8 the width is correct: 700 x 1.00 = 700

The original image has a resolution of 720 x 1280 pixels and in both versions the same settings were always used.

My findings are based on Windows.

Kind regards,
kodela

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

I see no pictures.

[kodela]

I've re-uploaded the images. The links should work now.

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

As long as you refuse to behave correctly, I won't read your reports. I'm fed up with your insults and your attitude.

[kodela]

I am very sorry that you feel offended by my posting. I did not want.
Yes, I have repeated your statement multiple times. These repetitions I removed.

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

There has been a lot of confusion between scale and zoom. They were added by two different developpers at different times... so don't expect much consistency there.

I think the rate should affect:
- if auto-scale is enabled, the requested size of the window,
- if auto-scale is disabled, the render size of the video, regardless of the window size.

Using width or height and scale simultaneously will never work. One of them has to take precedence.

[kodela]

Hi Rémi Denis-Courmont,

thank you for your reply.

I continued to experiment with the options width, auto scale, scale and zoom. And I've made strange findings.

Primary I have reset all the settings for 2.0.8 and 2.1.5.

After that, with 2.1.5 it did not come to the circumcisions (pictures 3 and 4 in my last posting).

To display a test image (320x180) I have made the following settings:

width = 200
height = -1
autoscale = false
scale = 0.50
zoom = 0.50

When I with 2.0.8 or 2.1.5 open the test image, it is displayed with the resolution 100x56.

(width 200 with scale or zoom 0.50: width is 100)

Now I open a second test image (1280x720). It appears as a small test image 100x56 with the resolution!!!

After several reproduction tests is
- The small test image with 160x90 and
- The big test image with 640x360 pixel display.

This behavior is reproducible for me on Windows 7 and Vista.

Summary:

The zoom function 2.1.n has replaces the scaling function in 2.0.n.

In 2.0.n zoom was unnecessary. In 2.1.n it's scale.

The sizes height and width have in 2.0.n priority over the Scale function. In 2.1.n the zoom function have in priority over the sizes height and width.

There must be a setting that causes the circumcision playing under 2.1.n. I have not found her yet.

regards, kodela