There's a program called PicPick that a friend recommended, and although I didn't think I needed another image editing program, because I've always found IrfanView and Photoshop sufficient, because I respect my friend, I tried it out. It has some useful tools available from the right-click menu of its system tray icon, and I've found the pixel ruler and the color picker handy for examining not only images viewed in IrfanView, but images displayed by other programs. (And another handy tool is the CrossHair cursor program, but I digress.)
Anyway, PicPick was installed and I'm playing with SVG and trying to learn how it works, and I generate some black lines on a white background in my browser, and screen capture them into IrfanView, and discover that when I zoom in to 1000% that the edges are fuzzy... instead of seeing pixels that are 10 times as big. So I tried PicPick, and it only allows integral zoom factors for enlargements (and ¼, ½, and ¾ for reductions)... so that is somewhat limited, but useful: I can actually measure the stroke width of my lines.
So, after all that justification, here is the question: is there a way to get "fat pixels" for zooming in IrfanView, whether or not it is bitonal. Yes, for nature pictures, the current zoom/blend technique is probably best. But for understanding what it actually in your picture, and perhaps editing it pixel by pixel, "fat pixels" would be useful.
Anyway, PicPick was installed and I'm playing with SVG and trying to learn how it works, and I generate some black lines on a white background in my browser, and screen capture them into IrfanView, and discover that when I zoom in to 1000% that the edges are fuzzy... instead of seeing pixels that are 10 times as big. So I tried PicPick, and it only allows integral zoom factors for enlargements (and ¼, ½, and ¾ for reductions)... so that is somewhat limited, but useful: I can actually measure the stroke width of my lines.
So, after all that justification, here is the question: is there a way to get "fat pixels" for zooming in IrfanView, whether or not it is bitonal. Yes, for nature pictures, the current zoom/blend technique is probably best. But for understanding what it actually in your picture, and perhaps editing it pixel by pixel, "fat pixels" would be useful.
Comment