Develop Reference

Best resolution resizing image using ImgScalr

I am very new to ImgScalr API.I need to resize my images to different views, one of them being a mobile view and second a thumbnail view.
I have made use of the resize method, but have a doubt. Which is the best of the resize method to resizing the image out of the multiple options available that keeps the proper aspect ratio(as in the image doesnt become blurred)
One thing I noticed was that every resize method takes in a targetSize argument. How does specifiying this field make sure that the aspect ratio of the image does not get affected.
What should the ideal arguments to the resize method be, given that I need to generate a 2 KB thumbnail view of my input image that may be of size of around 2 MB.
I am a bit confused because of the lack of enough documentation and examples.

imgscalr author here - definitely understand the confusion, the code base itself (if you happen to glance at GitHub) is almost 50% comments if you are curious how the library works, but from a usage perspective you are right - I didn't put a lot of time into examples.
Hopefully I can hit some highlights quickly for you...
Aspect Ratios
A core design tenant of imgscalr is to always honor the aspect ratio - so if you pass in 200x1 (some ridiculous dimension as an example) it will attempt to calculate the minimum dimension that will meet those 'target' dimensions.
This is handy if you always want your thumbnails in a certain box, like 200x200 -- just pass that in and imgscalr will determine a final width/height that won't be bigger than that (possibly something like 200x127 or 78x200)
Quality
By default the library does what is called a 'balanced' approach to quality by considering the delta in dimension change as well as scaling up/scaling down and chooses the most approach approach (speed VS quality).
You can force it to always scale as quickly as possible (good idea for scaling up operations) or can force it to always use high or ultra quality (good idea if you want really crisp thumbnails or other operations that drastically reduce the image resolution and you want them to still look decent)
On top of that you can also ask the library to apply some additional filtering to the image (called Image Ops) -- I ship some handy defaults out of the box like the anti-aliasing one if you are getting jagged edges on a lot of source material you are scaling (common when scaling screenshots of desktops and other things with diag straight lines)
Overall
The library is meant to be as simple as possible to use, something no harder than:
BufferedImage thumbnail = Scalr.resize(src, 128);
will get you started... all the other operations around quality, fitting, modes, ops, etc. are just additional things you can chose to do if you decide the result isn't quite what you wanted.
Hope that helps!

Libgdx Pixellated GUI Effect

In LibGDX, I am currently trying to achieve the effect of a pixellated GUI, meaning the buttons are pixellated, like an 8-bit theme.
When I make my GUI elements, such as a TextButton, I am using images that are small, say 34x16 pixels, but I am rendering them on a large resolution like 1920x1080. What is the best way to render such a small image at a high resolution?
My thoughts were to use stage.setViewport(WIDTH,HEIGHT), and set the width and height to a scaled down resolution, so the gui elements wouldn't be so big. This works, however when adding elements things go wrong.
This my stage/table currently, using a scaled down resolution. I am adding widgets using to the table like this:
table.add(playButton);
table.row();
table.add(title);
but as you can see, the table.row() makes a row that is much too large, perhaps a row fit for a larger resolution. Is there any way to change the gap that is made by the row? I would have thought that the gap would be zero, and by using table.add().pad() you could change the gap, but I am not doing any of that.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Ninepatch
This is a common issue in all apps. To overcome this, images which can be safely resized in parts are used. they are called ninepatches.
Here is a nice Tutorial about using them in libgdx.
Distance Field Fonts
Although you haven't mentioned it here, you'd also find font sizing (pixellated fonts) as an issue. For that Distance Field Fonts are used.
Hope this helps.

I would say don't worry about scaling them up and making the virtual resolution bigger. If you want to see picture still pixelated when you scale it use Texture filter. For your case you want to use Nearest filter. use it like this:
yourTexture.setFilter(TextureFilter.Nearest, TextureFilter.Nearest);
where yourTexture is the texture that you have all your bitmaps and skin elements on. If you are using texturePacker than you can specify the filter before packing too. Or just open the .pack file and on the top you will see filtering options, and edit those to Nearest.

How to resize a BufferedImage in Java

I am looking for the simplest (and still non-problematic) way to resize a BufferedImage in Java.
In some answer to a question, the user coobird suggested the following solution, in his words (very slightly changed by me):
**
The Graphics object has a method to draw an Image while also performing a resize operation:
Graphics.drawImage(Image, int, int, int, int, ImageObserver)
method can be used to specify the location along with the size of the image when drawing.
So, we could use a piece of code like this:
BufferedImage originalImage = // .. created somehow
BufferedImage newImage = new BufferedImage(SMALL_SIZE, SMALL_SIZE, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB);
Graphics g = newImage.createGraphics();
g.drawImage(originalImage, 0, 0, SMALL_SIZE, SMALL_SIZE, null);
g.dispose();
This will take originalImage and draw it on the newImage with the width and height of SMALL_SIZE.
**
This solution seems rather simple. I have two questions about it:
Will it also work (using the exact same code), if I want to resize an image to a larger size, not only a smaller one?
Are there any problems with this solution?
If there is a better way to do this, please suggest it.
Thanks

The major problem with single step scaling is they don't generally produce quality output, as they focus on taking the original and squeezing into a smaller space, usually by dropping out a lot of pixel information (different algorithms do different things, so I'm generalizing)
Will drawGraphics scale up and down, yes, will it do it efficiently or produce a quality output? These will come down to implementation, generally speaking, most of the scaling algorithms used by default are focused on speed. You can effect these in a little way, but generally, unless you're scaling over a small range, the quality generally suffers (from my experience).
You can take a look at The Perils of Image.getScaledInstance() for more details and discussions on the topic.
Generally, what is generally recommend is to either use a dedicated library, like imgscalr, which, from the ten minutes I've played with it, does a pretty good job or perform a stepped scale.
A stepped scale basically steps the image up or down by the power of 2 until it reaches it's desired size. Remember, scaling up is nothing more then taking a pixel and enlarging it a little, so quality will always be an issue if you scale up to a very large size.
For example...
Quality of Image after resize very low -- Java
Scale the ImageIcon automatically to label size
Java: JPanel background not scaling
Remember, any scaling is generally an expensive operation (based on the original and target size of the image), so it is generally best to try and do those operations out side of the paint process and in the background where possible.
There is also the question whether you want to maintain the aspect ratio of the image? Based on you example, the image would be scaled in a square manner (stretched to meet to the requirements of the target size), this is generally not desired. You can pass -1 to either the width or height parameter and the underlying algorithm will maintain the aspect ratio of the original image or you could simply take control and make more determinations over whether you want to fill or fit the image to a target area, for example...
Java: maintaining aspect ratio of JPanel background image
In general, I avoid using drawImage or getScaledInstance most of the time (if your scaling only over a small range or want to do a low quality, fast scale, these can work) and rely more on things like fit/fill a target area and stepped scaling. The reason for using my own methods simply comes down to not always being allowed to use outside libraries. Nice not to have to re-invent the wheel where you can

It will enlarge the original if you set the parameters so. But: you should use some smart algorithm which preserves edges because simply enlarging an image will make it blurry and will result in worse perceived quality.
No problems. Theoretically this can even be hardware-accelerated on certain platforms.

Printing in Java - Printable.print() resizes images

I have a custom report which draws via Graphics2D, and uses a lot of tiny BufferedImage sprites. PrinterJob.print() seems to be calling Printable.print() roughly once for each sprite (the actual count can vary both ways), so some pages are re-rendered 150 times... This causes printing to be unacceptably slow, about 10 seconds for two pages.
I found this: Why does the java Printable's print method get called multiple times with the same page number?
But it doesn't appear to explain my particular problem (or only partially explains it). I created a test report which has only a few sprites, and there was a small number of resizes that went up and down as I added and removed images on either the vertical or horizontal axes.
When printing to a PDF using Bullzip, I noticed that after zooming in on the images, they are being scaled up using a bilinear or bicubic algorithm. One of these images, which is unique in having an indexed color palette, does not appear to be scaled. I confirmed that the scaling is a Java behavior and not being performed by Bullzip by printing to a real printer and observing the same images being scaled versus not.
So it strikes me as the print API trying to rescale images to whatever DPI it has in mind, but for some reason it's calling Printable.print() each time it encounters an image that it deems as needing this treatment.
How do I fix this behavior? I tried setting rendering hints on the Graphics2D that I get when Printable.print() is called, to no avail. I don't know what else to do short of try to find and examine the print API's source code.

I think I just figured it out by accident. A report I just modified now draws an image over some geometry, and I noticed that the part of the geometry that's behind the box of the image is being rasterized and looks blurry compared to outside of the box. The image in question (and all other than the one indexed color image) has an 8 bit alpha channel.
I noticed before that Java's print rasterizer doesn't like things with translucency (one report which used it was being completely rasterized at I think 300dpi...), but I forgot that these images also had alpha channels.
When I get a chance, I'm probably going to fix this by further increasing the images' resolution and using 1 bit alpha. When scaled down for screen viewing, it will have a few bits of alpha again and look okay.

Appending to an Image File

I have written a program that takes a 'photo' and for every pixel it chooses to insert an image from a range of other photos. The image chosen is the photo of which the average colour is closest to the original pixel from the photograph.
I have done this by firstly averaging the rgb values from every pixel in 'stock' image and then converting it to CIE LAB so i could calculate the how 'close' it is to the pixel in question in terms of human perception of the colour.
I have then compiled an image where each pixel in the original 'photo' image has been replaced with the 'closest' stock image.
It works nicely and the effect is good however the stock image size is 300 by 300 pixels and even with the virtual machine flags of "-Xms2048m -Xmx2048m", which yes I know is ridiculus, on 555px by 540px image I can only replace the stock images scaled down to 50 px before I get an out of memory error.
So basically I am trying to think of solutions. Firstly I think the image effect itself may be improved by averaging every 4 pixels (2x2 square) of the original image into a single pixel and then replacing this pixel with the image, as this way the small photos will be more visible in the individual print. This should also allow me to draw the stock images at a greater size. Does anyone have any experience in this sort of image manipulation? If so what tricks have you discovered to produce a nice image.
Ultimately I think the way to reduce the memory errors would be to repeatedly save the image to disk and append the next line of images to the file whilst continually removing the old set of rendered images from memory. How can this be done? Is it similar to appending a normal file.
Any help in this last matter would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Alex

I suggest looking into the Java Advanced Imaging (JAI) API. You're probably using BufferedImage right now, which does keep everything in memory: source images as well as output images. This is known as "immediate mode" processing. When you call a method to resize the image, it happens immediately. As a result, you're still keeping the stock images in memory.
With JAI, there are two benefits you can take advantage of.
Deferred mode processing.
Tile computation.
Deferred mode means that the output images are not computed right when you call methods on the images. Instead, a call to resize an image creates a small "operator" object that can do the resizing later. This lets you construct chains, trees, or pipelines of operations. So, your work would build a tree of operations like "crop, resize, composite" for each stock image. The nice part is that the operations are just command objects so you aren't consuming all the memory while you build up your commands.
This API is pull-based. It defers computation until some output action pulls pixels from the operators. This quickly helps save time and memory by avoiding needless pixel operations.
For example, suppose you need an output image that is 2048 x 2048 pixels, scaled up from a 512x512 crop out of a source image that's 1600x512 pixels. Obviously, it doesn't make sense to scale up the entire 1600x512 source image, just to throw away 2/3 of the pixels. Instead, the scaling operator will have a "region of interest" (ROI) based on it's output dimensions. The scaling operator projects the ROI onto the source image and only computes those pixels.
The commands must eventually get evaluated. This happens in a few situations, mostly relating to output of the final image. So, asking for a BufferedImage to display the output on the screen will force all the commands to evaluate. Similarly, writing the output image to disk will force evaluation.
In some cases, you can keep the second benefit of JAI, which is tile based rendering. Whereas BufferedImage does all its work right away, across all pixels, tile rendering just operates on rectangular sections of the image at a time.
Using the example from before, the 2048x2048 output image will get broken into tiles. Suppose these are 256x256, then the entire image gets broken into 64 tiles. The JAI operator objects know how to work a tile at a tile. So, scaling the 512x512 section of the source image really happens 64 times on 64x64 source pixels at a time.
Computing a tile at a time means looping across the tiles, which would seem to take more time. However, two things work in your favor when doing tile computation. First, tiles can be evaluated on multiple threads concurrently. Second, the transient memory usage is much, much lower than immediate mode computation.
All of which is a long-winded explanation for why you want to use JAI for this type of image processing.
A couple of notes and caveats:
You can defeat tile based rendering without realizing it. Anywhere you've got a BufferedImage in the workstream, it cannot act as a tile source or sink.
If you render to disk using the JAI or JAI Image I/O operators for JPEG, then you're in good shape. If you try to use the JDK's built-in image classes, you'll need all the memory. (Basically, avoid mixing the two types of image manipulation. Immediate mode and deferred mode don't mix well.)
All the fancy stuff with ROIs, tiles, and deferred mode are transparent to the program. You just make API call on the JAI class. You only deal with the machinery if you need more control over things like tile sizes, caching, and concurrency.

Here's a suggestion that might be useful;
Try segregating the two main tasks into individual programs. Your first task is to decide which images go where, and that can be a simple mapping from coordinates to filenames, which can be represented as lines of text:
0,0,image123.jpg
0,1,image542.jpg
.....
After that task is done (and it sounds like you have it well handled), then you can have a separate program handle the compilation.
This compilation could be done by appending to an image, but you probably don't want to mess around with file formats yourself. It's better to let your programming environment do it by using a Java Image object of some sort. The biggest one you can fit in memory pixelwise will be 2GB leading to sqrt(2x10^9) maximum height and width. From this number and dividing by the number of images you have for height and width, you will get the overall pixels per subimage allowed., and can paint them into the appropriate places.

Every time you 'append' are you perhaps implicitly creating a new object with one more pixel to replace the old one (ie, a parallel to the classic problem of repeatedly appending to a String instead of using a StringBuilder) ?
If you post the portion of your code that does the storing and appending, someone will probably help you find an efficient way of recoding it.