LanczosResize

[maurus]

What is minimum bitrate for use LanczosResize instead of Bicubic?

[HarryM]

Originally posted by maurus
What is minimum bitrate for use LanczosResize instead of Bicubic?

Any 'minimum bitrate' don't exists. You can use bitrate as you wisch.

You think (possibly) bits per pixel.
Lanczos is comparable with Sharp Bicubic (b=0, c=0.75)

[maurus]

I read LanzcosResize only es very good for high bitrates (>900)...
< 900 is better neutral o soft bicubic?

[HarryM]

Originally posted by maurus
I read LanzcosResize only es very good for high bitrates (>900)...
< 900 is better neutral o soft bicubic?

It is depend on compressibility exactly, don't on bitrate.

I use Lanczos for movies with compressibility over 80%. Instead I use neutral bicubic (b=0, c=0.5).
Lanczos using lowering compressibility about -5% to -10%.

[NuclearFusi0n]

According to AVISynth's website, Bicubic resizes with c>.6 just artifically "sharpen" the image, causing ringing artifacts and other unwanted artifacts
Lanczos is basically a really sharp resize without the artifacts of bicubic

I would think that Lanczos is about as compressible as bicubic with b=0 and c=.7+, if not more due to the lack of ringing

[maurus]

Is Lanczos also better than neutral bicubic (c=0.5)?
Think you Lanczos is the better filter resize?

[HarryM]

Originally posted by maurus
Is Lanczos also better than neutral bicubic (c=0.5)?
Think you Lanczos is the better filter resize?

Yes and no. Lanczos is better (more precise) filter than bicubic, technically. But is worse compressable than bicubic too.

[maurus]

Thanks for all.