PS’ internal interpolation algorithms

In article ,
"" wrote:

Do we as users have any control of which interpolation algorithms PS uses internally to resize objects and pixels for display and rasterization?

Yes. It will use whatever you set in the Preferences for interpolation during rotation, skewing, free transform, and so forth.

It always uses a crude interpolation for on-screen viewing.

No interpolation is used for rasterizing a vector object.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

On Mar 5, 2:49 pm, tacit wrote:

Yes. It will use whatever you set in the Preferences for interpolation during rotation, skewing, free transform, and so forth.

Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

So this goes for rasterizing resized smart objects?

Thanks

In article ,
"" wrote:

Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all
athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

So this goes for rasterizing resized smart objects?

If you resize a vector smart object, it is still vector. No interpolation is done. When you rasterize it, it is rasterized at that size, which does not involve interpolation.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

On Mar 5, 6:43 pm, tacit wrote:

In article ,

"" wrote:

Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all
athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

So this goes for rasterizing resized smart objects?

If you resize a vector smart object, it is still vector. No interpolation is done. When you rasterize it, it is rasterized at that size, which does not involve interpolation.

—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all athttp://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

Wouldn’t a rasterized smart object be a special case vector in the sense that it is derived directly from pixels not mathematically and therefore interpolation must occur because the resulting image is not the same size as the original?