overidon.com Central Database for Overidon Omnimedia

April 1, 2011

Resizing and Upscaling images for Desktop Wallpaper

Filed under: Tips and Tricks — Tyler @ 11:27 pm
damselfly

Upscaled Image - Blurred on the top Half to remove pixelation

Sometimes while surfing the net, one may find an image that would be perfect as a desktop wallpaper. The problem is that not all images found on the web, are the perfect size to match the resolution of the current screen setup. So, even though we can choose to simply stretch the image to fit the screen, that can cause the image to look very blocky and pixelated. But if you have Adobe Photoshop or another similar program, there is an easy fix. There is a technique called Upscaling an image that is used often for the film and TV industry. It is kind of tricky, but they are able to take a low resolution image and make it larger, with a minimum amount of picture quality degradation. But since we aren’t working with video, we can simply resize the image and then add some blur in Photoshop to smooth out the blocky pixels. The first thing to do is to find out if the image you have is the right proportions for your desktop resolution. If you don’t care about stretching or distorting the image, then this isn’t a big deal. But if the image would look wrong if the proportions were manipulated, then you might want to crop the image to match the proportion of your screen.

So let’s say you have an image that is 900 x 750 (1.2 : 1) and your screen resolution is 1024 x 800 (1.28 : 1). This means that if you divide the width of your image by the length of the image, the ratio of width to length is 1.2 and with this in mind if you divide the width of your actual desktop resolution by the length then you get a ratio of 1.28. So if we want to preserve the ratio of the image we need to crop the image before we resize it.

But by how much should we crop the image?

Well, since we have a target ratio of 1.28 for the screen resolution, then we just need to crop the image enough to get it to change from 1.2 to 1.28, so it won’t take much.

A simple way to do this would be to multiply the length of the image by 1.28. What this will do is tell us what the new size of the width of the image should be, in order to have an image that is proportional to the screen resolution of the desktop.

Here goes! 750 (image length) * (times) 1.28 (ratio of the desktop resolution =  960 (target width)

This result of  ‘960’ makes sense because it is only a little bigger than the original size of the image…but wait, there’s a problem! If the original image is only 900 pixels in width then where are we supposed to come up with the extra 60 pixels? Exactly! We can’t simply add information without distorting the image, so since we are going to crop the image. We need to actually take away some information from the width and length of the image.

You can do this by eyeballing it, or else you can simply multiply the length and new width of the image by something like 0.90 (which is 90%). Do this to both numbers and you will still have a ratio of 1.28 : 1 which will match up with the target ratio for the desktop resolution.

So now you should do this: 960 (modified width) * (times) 0.90 (90 percent)    and then 750 (length) * (times) 0.90 (90 percent)

This should give us a cropped width of 864  and a cropped length of 675. All we have to do now is make sure the image is cropped by 36 pixels from the original width size (900) and crop 75 pixels from the original length size (750). This will give us the perfect proportions.

So now when we change the image size in Photoshop from 864 x 675 into 1024 x 800. The proportions will be exactly right. But now we have a pixelated and blocky image, so we move onto the next step.

All that is necessary to do now is to blur the image under “FILTER – BLUR” and/or “FILTER/BLUR MORE” options in the menu area. The more you blur the image, the less blocky it will look like. But if you blur it too much, it may look too low-quality, so pick a happy medium. The cool thing about desktop wallpapers, is that it is allright if they are slightly blurry, because we don’t usually focus intently on them anyway. But if the image is too blocky, it can be a real distraction.

When you are done I recommend saving the image as a high quality jpeg or an excellent quality bitmap. Because desktop backgrounds have been able to read high quality bitmap (bmp) files ever since Windows 3.1 back in the day. So there is no real need to skimp on quality, especially since you already put in all this work into your image.

I hope you had fun resizing and cropping and upscaling your image!

-Tyler

PS: This is a very jerry-rigged version of upscaling so always try to use hiqhest quality images when doing anything for professional projects!

 

 

damselfly

Upscaled Image - Blurred on the top Half to remove pixelation

Sometimes while surfing the net, one may find an image that would be perfect as a desktop wallpaper. The problem is that not all images found on the web, are the perfect size to match the resolution of the current screen setup. So, even though we can choose to simply stretch the image to fit the screen, that can cause the image to look very blocky and pixelated. But if you have Adobe Photoshop or another similar program, there is an easy fix. There is a technique called Upscaling an image that is used often for the film and TV industry. It is kind of tricky, but they are able to take a low resolution image and make it larger, with a minimum amount of picture quality degradation. But since we aren’t working with video, we can simply resize the image and then add some blur in Photoshop to smooth out the blocky pixels. The first thing to do is to find out if the image you have is the right proportions for your desktop resolution. If you don’t care about stretching or distorting the image, then this isn’t a big deal. But if the image would look wrong if the proportions were manipulated, then you might want to crop the image to match the proportion of your screen.

So let’s say you have an image that is 900 x 750 (1.2 : 1) and your screen resolution is 1024 x 800 (1.28 : 1). This means that if you divide the width of your image by the length of the image, the ratio of width to length is 1.2 and with this in mind if you divide the width of your actual desktop resolution by the length then you get a ratio of 1.28. So if we want to preserve the ratio of the image we need to crop the image before we resize it.

But by how much should we crop the image?

Well, since we have a target ratio of 1.28 for the screen resolution, then we just need to crop the image enough to get it to change from 1.2 to 1.28, so it won’t take much.

A simple way to do this would be to multiply the length of the image by 1.28. What this will do is tell us what the new size of the width of the image should be, in order to have an image that is proportional to the screen resolution of the desktop.

Here goes! 750 (image length) * (times) 1.28 (ratio of the desktop resolution =  960 (target width)

This result of  ‘960’ makes sense because it is only a little bigger than the original size of the image…but wait, there’s a problem! If the original image is only 900 pixels in width then where are we supposed to come up with the extra 60 pixels? Exactly! We can’t simply add information without distorting the image, so since we are going to crop the image. We need to actually take away some information from the width and length of the image.

You can do this by eyeballing it, or else you can simply multiply the length and new width of the image by something like 0.90 (which is 90%). Do this to both numbers and you will still have a ratio of 1.28 : 1 which will match up with the target ratio for the desktop resolution.

So now you should do this: 960 (modified width) * (times) 0.90 (90 percent)    and then 750 (length) * (times) 0.90 (90 percent)

This should give us a cropped width of 864  and a cropped length of 675. All we have to do now is make sure the image is cropped by 36 pixels from the original width size (900) and crop 75 pixels from the original length size (750). This will give us the perfect proportions.

So now when we change the image size in Photoshop from 864 x 675 into 1024 x 800. The proportions will be exactly right. But now we have a pixelated and blocky image, so we move onto the next step.

All that is necessary to do now is to blur the image under “FILTER – BLUR” and/or “FILTER/BLUR MORE” options in the menu area. The more you blur the image, the less blocky it will look like. But if you blur it too much, it may look too low-quality, so pick a happy medium. The cool thing about desktop wallpapers, is that it is allright if they are slightly blurry, because we don’t usually focus intently on them anyway. But if the image is too blocky, it can be a real distraction.

When you are done I recommend saving the image as a high quality jpeg or an excellent quality bitmap. Because desktop backgrounds have been able to read high quality bitmap (bmp) files ever since Windows 3.1 back in the day. So there is no real need to skimp on quality, especially since you already put in all this work into your image.

I hope you had fun resizing and cropping and upscaling your image!

-Tyler

PS: This is a very jerry-rigged version of upscaling so always try to use hiqhest quality images when doing anything for professional projects!

 

 

March 30, 2011

The Rate of Magnetic Pole Shift is increasing

Filed under: Innovation — Tyler @ 3:14 pm
magnet

magnet

The Earth’s Magnetic North Pole has literally shifted from Canada to Siberia (Russia).  According to Dr. Chris Connor during a news excerpt from NBC, he said, “…it’s been moving, and now it’s moved all the way from northern Canada into northern Siberia.” What it interesting is that Dr. Connor didn’t say what most websites and news sources are saying. Most sources I’ve read say that the Magnetic Pole is “shift-ING” to Siberia. But Dr. Connor very clearly says “moved.” This means that the pole is already in Siberia. The reason why this is worth discussing is because an article written in 2003 on the NASA website regarding Magnetic Fields, said that at the current rate of Magnetic Pole shift in 2003, the pole would move from North America to Siberia in “a few decades.” Now, when I hear the words, one decade, I think of 10 years. And a couple decades would mean around 20 years. But when I hear “a few decades” I definitely think of a minimum of 20 years, more in the ballpark of 21 to 60 years. This means that in 7 years, the magnetic poles have shifted what NASA predicted what would happen in a much longer period of time.

When I saw the movie, 2012 that starred John Cusack, I thought the scene where all the magnetic poles were shifting was an interesting Science-Fiction plot device. I never thought that this would actually happen in my lifetime. Although the film was highly stylized, the mere fact that the rate of pole shift is increasing is disconcerting at best.

-Tyler

SOURCES:

NBC News (Big thank you to NBC for broadcasting this excellent short piece on an interesting and important issue)

NASA: Earth’s Inconstant Magnetic Field, published December 29th, 2003. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/29dec_magneticfield/

FoxNews.com: Ordinary Compasses Thrown Off by Changes in Earth’s Magnetic Field, written by Loren Grush, published February 25th, 2011. http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/25/ordinary-compasses-thrown-changes-earths-magnetic-field/

Wikipedia: North Magnetic Pole, retrieved March 30th, 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Magnetic_Pole

 

 

March 29, 2011

Male Energy Cultivation Experiment 004B

Filed under: MECE — Tyler @ 5:42 pm

Finally making some tangible progress. My digestive furnace is at similar levels to what it was like during high school water polo days. I knew something was different yesterday when my body basically ordered my food for me at Veggie Grill. I purchased a large bowl of vegetarian chili, which is basically a bean stew. And I also slurped some tomato basil soup. My stomach was so hungry I didn’t even dare jump straight into solid food.

Today at the gym the exercises went very well. I’ve come to realize that the actual pounds of weight have been more optimally implemented when I use them as toops to do targeted exercises. This is opposed to having the weights themselves act as some sort of benchmark.

I’ve also come to the conclusion that the gym should be a vehicle to improve breathing, not a method to increase physical power. Although physical strength may be and recently has been a byproduct of the improved breath support, it is not the goal.

-Tyler

March 28, 2011

The Mirror Song will Erase This sorrow

Filed under: Music-Reviews — Tyler @ 11:41 pm
Mirror Song - Erase This

Mirror Song - Erase This

The level of sincerity and beauty in the, “Mirror Song” captured my heart. The harmonies between Luke Conrad and Kristina Horner take no prisoners in the battle for evoking one’s emotions. Regardless of how macho or technical the listener may be, Luke Conrad and Alan Lastufka created a song that anyone who has a beating heart will enjoy. The song is mostly a vocal duet with piano. But even with its sparse instrumentation, it has a complete and satisfying sound that perfectly balances with the personality and skill of the vocalists. After listening to the song with a distinguishing ear, the bass and also some either some pads or violins kick in during the chorus. The music is beyond touching and it is a real pleasure to even be discussing this work of art right now. One doesn’t need to have recently lost a love, or be in a long distance relationship to appreciate the Mirror Song. For if you have never felt such ache before, you will by the end of video. And that ache will elevate you.

The music video has some great imagery. The characters portrayed don’t feel forced over ’emo’ at all. In fact the video’s use of fades seem to articulate the feelings of distance combined with the most intimate closeness quite well. There is an intriguing dichotomy of setting choices in the video. Even though both Conrad and Horner both appear to be in a Seattle-eque environment, the masculine character is singing often among a backdrop of industry. And the female character expresses her melodies with the water and a grey city in the background.

When Conrad and Horner are together walking through a huge concrete sculpture at 3 minutes and 11 seconds, I was reminded of ancient Sumerian gates. So that was a real plus. Also it creates an intimate and sensual frame for their walk into the vanishing point.

The harmony choices in the Mirror Song are bogglingly drenched with the sorrow of sentiment. When Luke and Kristina sings the words, “fairytale picture book” at 1 minute and 27 seconds, the rhythm and harmony melts into one another flawlessly. And that flawlessness is exemplified by the articulation and purely serene tone of both artists.

I’m not 100% certain about this, but there may be a connection to the film, “The Shining” at 2 minutes and zero seconds. You decide.

The singers Conrad and Horner look great in the video and definitely match with the feel and theme of the song. Kristina Horner wears a headband and those always look great on girls with long hair. Her facial expressions definitely reward the listener for enjoying the song in a music video format.

The album called, “Erase This” is available in physical CD format from DFTBA Records by clicking HERE.

If you would like to purchase a digital format of the, “Mirror Song” from iTunes, then click HERE.

-Tyler

 

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress