f



looks like in PIL, resize() will give high quality thumbnails than thumbnail()

In PIL, since thumbnail() first makes a draft copy of the image, and
then resize it, so thumbnail() can run a lot faster than resize()
because draft() seems a lot faster when resizing from very big images
to small images...  (such as the original image is 3000 x 2000, and it
can make a draft really quickly to 375 x 250, and then resize to, say
200 x 133 as a thumbnail)

However, the double resizing probably will make a thumbnail with a
lower quality than if it is directly resizing from the original... as
each resizing involves some approximation.

however, i tried directly using resize() and it is a lot slower.

But looks like if quality is of concern and time is not an issue, then
we can use the resize() to create thumbnails instead.

0
7/1/2006 10:55:20 AM
comp.lang.python 77058 articles. 6 followers. Post Follow

1 Replies
214 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 19

Summercooln...@gmail.com wrote:
> In PIL, since thumbnail() first makes a draft copy of the image, and
> then resize it, so thumbnail() can run a lot faster than resize()
> because draft() seems a lot faster when resizing from very big images
> to small images...  (such as the original image is 3000 x 2000, and it
> can make a draft really quickly to 375 x 250, and then resize to, say
> 200 x 133 as a thumbnail)

as a matter of fact, i tried using thumbnail() to resize photos of 3456
x 2304 to 800 x 533 and it is a lot faster than using resize()

0
7/1/2006 10:58:32 AM
Reply: