Pixelation
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: QuickSilva on March 10, 2009, 06:39:47 pm
-
Is Firefox 3 still blurring images or has it been fixed now?
Thanks,
Jason.
-
It's still blurring the pixels. Haven't found a cure yet either.
-
Is Firefox 3 still blurring images or has it been fixed now?
Did it ever blur images? Mine certainly never has, and continues not to.
gyaha ha ha ha ha. :lol:
-
Unless you run linux, that seems implausible...
-
There was a post on PJ that said they might put in an option in their next update... and here we are two updates later.
-
Due to all that mess, I switched to Opera. Not that bad as they say it is. :)
There must be a way, I don't believe it's *just* impossible. Or maybe? We've been discussing the matter a million times before, and still no real solution came out of it.
By the way, do you have the links to where I can download the FF2 2.0.0.20 version? I think it'll come handy for those who want to get back to it.
-
Unless you run linux, that seems implausible...
Hence its complete plausibility :)
-
Still suffering FF3 here as well. I wish they'd listen to the complaints.
-
...do you have the links to where I can download the FF2 2.0.0.20 version? ...
http://filehippo.com/download_firefox/5015/
-
Or you can download from the firefox website itself. LAst time I checked they were offering all of the previous versions.
And has it already been two updates without adding that guy's simple fix allowing the blur to be configurable. Very disappointing. Anyone got any links to the bug report with the guy who posted a fix he wanted to be included in the next update?
-
Thank you!
crab2, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423756
and the news entry posted at PJ: http://pixeljoint.com/2009/01/11/2722/FF3_image_filter_switch.htm
-
erm. I could have sworn I already posted this, but I'll post it again.
IE Tab. It uses IE's rendering engine within firefox's frame. You can switch back and forth at will, or you can designate specific sites to always use IE's engine. I use it for this place and Moby Games and a few other sites that up-scale pixels. Works well for me. I've been coming here with Firefox 3 for months. Same browser, same behavior, just different rendering engine for the pages / layouts. Give it a shot.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1419
-
This is positively preverse, but I will do it. Curse you FF developers for making me bring back IE on my computer on *any* capacity.
-
Hm no I didn't like it. I've decided to use BBMagnifiy, a small utility easy found online. It does this:
(http://www.locustleaves.com/bbmag.png)
Which is fair enough. I wonder if I'll need more zoom than this.
-
An alternative to BBMagnify would be to use Windows XP's Magnify (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/accessibility/magnifierturnon.mspx)
-
Oh I didn't know about that one! It's better since it has levels of zoom already built in. Thanks. Keeping it.
I still wish FF team would fix the issue so I can just use the my imagezoom extension as usual, but this'll do in the meantime, without any yucky IE stuff.
-
If anyone else has a Mac (probably like 2 other people), you also have a built-in zoom function, just hold down control and spin your mouse wheel up or down. I believe you can adjust the settings in preferences -> universal access.
-
I have used Opera for years. I find it better than Firefox by an order of magnitude. Mouse gestures are a gift from the gods.
-
I changed to Opera too after all this IE / FF hassle. So far I've liked it, there are few minor issues that bug me personally but they're nothing compared to image blurring with other browsers. Which crash and have bugs as well :) So it's a win-win.
-
Just jumping in to say, I just switched to Opera and I'm loving it. Very versatile. I might just buy it for my Wii now!
Later
Shrike
-
I just got Opera as well, and I like it so far, but it seems to treat filtering randomly for me. Some images will be filtered, and some will zoom fine. What's up with that?? :-\
-
I just got Opera as well, and I like it so far, but it seems to treat filtering randomly for me. Some images will be filtered, and some will zoom fine. What's up with that?? :-\
No idea but here you have the solution:
- In your address field, type: "opera:config",
- now in the "Quick find" box, type: "interpolate";
- it will find you the "Interpolate Images" option, just tackle it out
- and you're done.
-
there is a voting enhancement which can, apparently, improve our chances of getting it expedited.
Perhaps we should encourage everyone to create an account and vote
-
Just voted and posted a comment. At least FF2.0 is a damn good browser so I don't feel bad while waiting for 3.0 to lose the crap blur. If this goes on much longer I'm going to have to take a look at Opera.
-
where do you sign up to vote fotr that?
-
There is a login at the top of the page leading to the signup form
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423756
-
Voted. Thanks for link.
Opera is quite nice tho... :y: :lol: haha my brother will kill me, he's a firefox guy. But he doesn't know about it's hidden secrets when it comes to pixels...
-
I wholeheartedly urge our userbase to sign up to vote for this. I did.
-
Until Firefox 3 fixes the blurring issue, I have Firefox 3 installed on the computer and Firefox 2 installed on my thumbdrive. Whenever I surf Pixelation / PixelJoint I just boot the thumbdrive browser to enjoy crispy jagged zooming pixels! When doing other surfing though, just load up the up-to-date version on my computer to bask in the non-screwy features of FF3 with my addons and such.
Should we have to resort to practices like this until it's fixed? No, but it doesn't bother me too much. ;)
-
There's been a lot of activity recently in the bugzilla report. I don't know exactly how these bug reports work, so the mentions of blocks up at the top has me a little worried, but sounds like a fix is not too far off
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423756
-
So what has happened on this front? Is there a non-apparent solution to the problem I haven't understood from reading the bug report? Can someone tech-savvy clue us plebs in on how to fix this now if it's fixable?
-
Edit: I downloaded Firefox 3.5 beta 4, and it seems this is only in later builds as of now. I assume they'll add it for the final 3.5 build. If someone can confirm which build it works with and where to get it, please post.
Edit 2: I downloaded the latest build from http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/ (http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/), 3.6a1pre, and with that build the solution mentioned below works. Note however that it's (afaik) not a stable build, and odd behaviour and crashes might occur when using a non stable build.
Well, from what I gathered in that bug report thread, they added a way of disabling it for certain images by using the css attribute image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges;
What to do with it as a website owner/admin:
- Enable the css attribute for images that aren't supposed to be blurred
What to do with it as a user:
- Firefox has a settings file that controls css content, userContent.css, if you add the image-rendering tag in there it will always be off by default, so all images will be rendered without filtering unless a website disables it.
Where can I find userContent.css?
Windows: C:\Documents and Settings\<username>\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\<random string>\chrome\
Mac OSX: home\Library\Application Support\Firefox\Profiles\<profilename>\<randomstring>.default\chrome\
Linux: ~/.mozilla/<linux login name>/<random string>.slt/
Find the file, open it up for editing, add this line at the bottom:
img { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; }
If you haven't edited it before, there's a chance there's only a file called "userContent-example.css" there, if so, open it upp, add the line at the bottom, and resave it as userContent.css
-
That's Minefield though, isn't it? The new browser by Mozilla. It won't natively install over the firefox I have now so I'll have to migrate bookmarks and passwords, right?
In that case I might as well wait for Minefield to go stable and switch once and for all then.
-
Hmm, I just assumed Minefield was some sort of build name. I downloaded the zipped version, extracted and ran it. It used my existing firefox bookmarks and information, and it used the userContent.css information just the same as Firefox.
Edit: Did a quick wikipedia, and "Minefield, the branding used for trunk builds of Mozilla Firefox" came up. So I believe it's Firefox, it just can't be branded Firefox until it's stable or final.
-
I made a test page (http://androidarts.com/crisp/firefox_crisp_scaling.htm) using this page (https://developer.mozilla.org/En/CSS/Image-rendering) as a reference. Note that the top lest corner will be crisp regardless, because the image is cropped there. The right side has some air and is thus blurry.
-
GAH!!! Just reading that bug report makes me want to tear my eyes out.
The other thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned in there is that the bilinear filtering method that cairo uses is wildly inappropriate even in a lot of downscaling operations. It blurs the hell out of images. This is conjecture but I suspect that a highly "optimised" algorythm may be in effect. After so much time, and then this. I think I'm switching to something else permanently.
-
You might want to get off the high horse there Don Risotto.
I'm sure the Firefox people just put it in because 99% of the people WILL perceive it as being better looking this way.
-
I have been happily using FF2 since downgrading. it goes right over FF3 and erases any memory of the product. I'm sure some things won't work as well, but hey, I like my pixels.
Still waiting for an effective way to address the problem without staying in the "stone-age" of 2007.
-
You might want to get off the high horse there Don Risotto.
I'm sure the Firefox people just put it in because 99% of the people WILL perceive it as being better looking this way.
not a high horse nothin. I just don't like choice being taken away from me. How exactly is it detrimental to have a simple switch in about:config?
The seemingly complete denial from devs as to there being an issue or even a question of user choice frustrates me. Not simply for aesthetic reasons either. I'm trying to build a super low spec pc and for some idiot reason I'm using windows XP? well firefox just stopped being my browser of choice.
edit: and in case I didn't make it clear, yes I think that bilinear filtering should be on by default. I just really don't like not being able to turn it off. hell if we're going that far, why not enable lancsoz filtering for those with high specced pc's? it would sure look pretty.
-
My point is that 99% of the firefox users don't even know or see the difference. It just looks prettier now to them. Why would Firefox be a bad browser for not immediately catering for less than 1% of their user base? Firefox was never meant to be run in a low level environment anyway, so that point is moot too. If you're running FF in a low-level environment, you're going to have much more problems with the high RAM use than the tiny bit of interpolating going on.
Besides, the bug is propagating, a fix has been made, it's gone into the nightlies and it's going to be be in one of the future releases. What more CAN they do?
-
if it's now being looked into then sure, that's fine. what really irritated me was the deliberate integration of a solution that changed functionality in a negative fashion, and then stonewalling any attempts to bring issue with it.
I only care because firefox has always afforded me excellent user control, and I think this issue is pertinent to a far broader community than "people who want to make leetle pictures bigger" even if most of them are apparently oblivious to it.
edit: oh, and the filtering method in it's current incarnation actually destroys data. would you be so nonchalant about all your gif's and png's being converted to jpeg and resampled because it looks "nicer"?
AOL flashbacks
-
So, where do you get all that info?
Firefox 3 was released, people filed a bug report, some dude made an awful patch to fix it, they took some time to make a proper patch, it's going through the nightlies and now it's close to being released in a final.
I don't see the stonewalling, I don't see the lessened user control, etc. All I see is a simple interpolation update having ramifications they didn't foresee, then a proper way of handling it through bug reports and patch propagation.
-
no data is destroyed. right click - view image. always come pure without resampling. hold control to do that in a new tab and you've got a way to view images without even disrupting your flow.
For us it's a nuisance, but like gil said for most of the userbase it's a significant improvement for photographs and as to why they didn't think to include a switchback initially, why should they have? They responded to feedback with a patch as quickly as any large group does, and the fact that they responded period puts them a step ahead of some other providers. The level of anger/resentment seems disproportionate, especially with so many workarounds available if you do somehow care that much.
-
I should designate ndchristie as my spokes person, he usually explains my broken language much more eloquently.
-
Just linking what i saw over at PJ
Pj news: http://www.pixeljoint.com/2009/06/13/2854/Bilinear_Filtering_is_over.htm
A direct link: https://developer.mozilla.org/En/CSS/image-rendering
-
Well I'm glad it's been addressed. Yeah, maybe I was a bit over the top about it, but it's just so damn frustrating. :blind:
-
One thing I didn't like about how the Firefox staff handled the problem is the strong reluctance to listen to the people reporting. From what I recall, a lot of the people adressing the reports were arguing that it was better rather than just acknowledging people didn't like it... and a lot of them didn't even seem to realize what the people were talking about for a long time. It was a bit discouraging.
However, I'll be glad when this fix comes out, though I wasn't exactly happy with the route they took(I'd have much preferred a simple about:config option).
-
The current solution is even better Dusty.
Pixelation can add this new CSS to their style sheet, so any user coming here using FF3.6 will already get nonblurry zooming, without having to explain every new user that they need to change about:config options to fully enjoy the site.
As for yourself, if you want to display all images on the web in nearest neighbour, all you have to do is edit your usercontent.css accordingly, which is just a simple edit. I'm going to create a script that only applies it to certain sites for myself. I actually like the filtering if applied to photographs, etc.
-
i use great sysinternal util http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897434.aspx
try it
-
So now that Firefox 3.5 has been released is there a way to remedy the blurring problem or does it still exists?
Jason.
-
Its not fixed in 3.5 but it is fixed in the 3.6. Link. (http://pixeljoint.com/2009/06/15/2859/Fix_Firefox.htm)
-
That works great, thanks for the link 32. ;D
-
Hey guys,
I've just noticed something weird while playing around with Minefield: while the image zooming _appears_ to be correct, it unfortunately isn't.
It does use the nearest neighbor filter, but the image isn't resized to x2 but slightly more.
E.g. a mockup from the Megaman MF (256x224) gets resized to 569x497 (instead of 512x448), resulting in every other line having a width of 3 pixels.
Could this be a problem with pixelation's imagezoom script?
-
Unlikely. It scales properly in IE, Opera, and Firefox.
-
KhrisMUC: It probably just means your page zoom is set > 100%.
-
So obvious.. :P
Sorry.
-
Sorry about the year leaping bump but just for future references I feel I need to post this here.
The Firefox blurring issue should be fixed by now as long as there is the following css in the sites style sheet.
img {image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges;}
For people that want every site on the web to have pixel perfect images with no blurring please install the Firefox Addon called Stylish and add the following new style:
@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);
img {image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges;}
This will remove blurring from all sites. ;D
-
NECROPOST FOR JUSTICE
The css fix implemented for 3.x versions of firefox migrates to brand-new 4 perfectly as far as I can tell. Enjoy your browser update with sharp, crisp pixels.
-
NECROPOST THE SECOND.
recently I've killed firefox, it became too bloaty and unresponsive. I'm on chrome now. What's the status on crisp pixel zoom on it?
-
I'm afraid it's still stuck in developer hell, Helm.
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1502
This is where you can sign up for (infrequent) updates.
-
Dang. I'll survive. I like chrome otherwise.
-
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56627
It looks like now that people want to create video games in HTML Canvas without the pixel art blurring horribly, WebKit will finally get a CSS tag for crisp image zoom. It's in the nightly builds now, after which point it should make it into stable builds of WebKit, after which point it should be rolled into stable builds of Chrome.
-
Crow already informed me of the fix and it is in our CSS style sheet. If it works of course will depend on the browser build.
-
Finally they added a fix. Thanks for the update guys.
Hopefully it will hit mainstream Chrome and we can finally put the interpolation wars to rest.
-
Good to see that this is finally getting into the release versions of everything. Took them long enough :P
-
Yay!
:)
-
Started getting blurring again, but only on pixelation, using firefox 9. Seems like the usercontent fix is still working for every other site, even viewing an image will let me zoom nearest neighbor, only happening when I zoom in a pixelation thread, only in posts, avatars, and stuff scale fine (using imagezoom).
-
Hey, I'm getting the blurring too :mean:
The old fix in about:config from that Pixeljoint news update (http://www.pixeljoint.com/2009/01/11/2722/FF3_image_filter_switch.htm) stopped working, since there IS no gfx.image anymore, also I found this lead https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS/image-rendering that points to some gecko extension but I cant seem to find it, doesnt seem to be a client-side fix, most likely something serverside or browserside
-
Not ideal, but this is what I do:
Download 'Stylish', there should be a little 'S' symbol in the bottom left corner of your browser. Click on that and choose: write new style > for this URL. Then it opens a window with some code in it. Just delete everything in there and paste the code below. Then enable the style.
@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);
@-moz-document domain("pixeljoint.com") {
/*Main Styles*/
img { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; }
}
-
Shouldn't you change the dd to this site's like so?:
@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);
@-moz-document domain("wayofthepixel.net") {
/*Main Styles*/
img { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; }
}
Even so though, it doesn't work for this site.
Atleast not for me anyways.
Although it does work for PixelJoint.
-
Oh yeah :lol:
Which FF do you have Conceit? I have 11.0 and Pixelation's click zoom is smooth for me.
-
11, same version as you :(
-
I'm running 11 but on mac, I'mma try that script you gave me, thanks =)
-
Running Firefox 11 with Stylish 1.2.6 and can't seem to get it to work :/
Also, zooming in on pixeljoint(without Stylish) has no zooming issues so I can only assume this sort of css is out of Stylish's boundaries or something?
Surely this would be easy for one of the admins to add to the stylesheet for the site?
edit: If you have Stylish just click the icon and click "find styles for this site." Seems installing that works fine, rather then trying to create it myself. *shrug*
Further edit: seems I'm the one who uploaded that... :o
-
edit: If you have Stylish just click the icon and click "find styles for this site." Seems installing that works fine, rather then trying to create it myself. *shrug*
can confirm, this works ^_^