The only accurate filter I saw in image editors is lo-halo and no-halo, but they do not respect edges (It glows).
A lot have bicubic, but it omits similar details as bilinear (but respects position), and does not gain the pattern detail of nearest/pixel-perfect.
I think position-based averaging is good (positonal and pattern) and should be more popular, I think youtube shows.
So it is basically box colission, percentage steak calculation for shrinking. For increasing, u can slap it flat and only average the edges, try to do average smoothening and optionally make it so reversing it, leads to the same result (I just care about shrinking).
For bicubic, a gamedev showed me a better version: catmull-rom, see ttps://observablehq.com/@rreusser/bicubic-texture-interpolation-using-linear-filtering
t's less smoothed out too much, it preserves color, it keeps volume (and you don't get linear star effect, but more round).
It passes through all pixels instead of approximating splines.
The only accurate filter I saw in image editors is lo-halo and no-halo, but they do not respect edges (It glows).
A lot have bicubic, but it omits similar details as bilinear (but respects position), and does not gain the pattern detail of nearest/pixel-perfect.
I think position-based averaging is good (positonal and pattern) and should be more popular, I think youtube shows.
So it is basically box colission, percentage steak calculation for shrinking. For increasing, u can slap it flat and only average the edges, try to do average smoothening and optionally make it so reversing it, leads to the same result (I just care about shrinking).
For bicubic, a gamedev showed me a better version: catmull-rom, see ttps://observablehq.com/@rreusser/bicubic-texture-interpolation-using-linear-filtering
t's less smoothed out too much, it preserves color, it keeps volume (and you don't get linear star effect, but more round).
It passes through all pixels instead of approximating splines.