Forum:AA or not for trans?

Forums: Yew Grove > AA or not for trans?

This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 29 January 2011 by Liquidhelium.

There has been a little discussion about what transparency should be adviced here, [[Template:AA|here]] and [[Template:Anti-aliasing needed|here]]. This started because the 2 Anti Aliasing templates conflict each other. The one says it should have AA, though the other says it should NOT have it. I think this should all be changed to that the images need AA trans because it is a great improvement in detail([1][2]) and if you are able to make AA images, these advisements of not using AA is stopping better quality images to be uploaded to the wiki. If i speak for myself, i saw the [[template:AA]] being added to my image, i started making non-AA images([3]→[4]) while i could make AA images with my pc, which is not for every user. This is a loss to the wiki, and it should be prevented that this happens again.(i made non-aa images for a lot of images, which i shouldn't have done)

What i suggest is that LordDarkPhantom's Transparency guide will be made official(with a RuneScape: page or something) and the templates and the Image/Media policy will be changed that AA images are adviced above non-aa images. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 18:43, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

AA

Pros

Faster transparency
Smoother images at full size

Cons

Looks blurry when resized

Suggested usage

Locations/scenery
Animations

Non-AA

Pros

Looks AA when resized on article (only if image is large)
Transparency is easier to learn
Transparency is applyable in all editors

Cons

Far slower transparency
Pixelated edges at full sizes
Needs to be bigger for smooth edges

Suggested usage

NPCs or monsters
Detailed items

Discussion

Support - As nom JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 22:34, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Anti-aliasing for transparent images, especially large images such as npcs, its useless because all large images are scaled when they are used in a page, and therefore have anti-aliasing applied to them anyways. If you want to do it then go ahead, but it should not be mandated, or even suggested. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk 21:40, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

AA trans is easier(selecting corners of the thing instead of all clicking all pixels)
When clikcing to enlarge you want to see a nice image, not a pixelated one... JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 22:34, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per the unstable machine. Evil1888 ^{Talk A's L} 21:59, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psycho. User:Haloolah123/Sig 22:16, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psycho. User:TyA/sig 22:29, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - These templates are from a time when we did not have many users with the ability to add anti-aliased transparency. During this time anti-aliasing was suggested (as it is now) for landscape images and others that do not require transparency. If a particular image would look better with or without anti-aliasing for some reason, these templates might come in handy, but if an image is taken with anti-aliasing the transparency should definitely be also. Either way, I find that they take me about the same amount of time. Riblet 15 22:48, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Support - We've kinda forgotten the end bit of Joey's proposal. I oppose the rest of it, but LDP's transparency guide would be very beneficial if made official. 222 ^talk 23:03, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - What reasons do you have why AA should not be added, exept for "it is useless because all large images are scaled when they are used in a page" (- robot)
I think the image should be nice when enlarged too, as people will do that too. If not, all images should be resized anyway(instead of on the page) because of the filesize, which is not wise because that does not give it smoother edges, and it does only reduce detail.
Please give more reasons if you oppose, as imho the consensus is Support because we don't count votes but reasons, and imho my reasons are better(so far) than yours.(My opinion, not a fact)
All i want to have added is that it is adviced that AA images are made instead of non-AA images, because it is easier to apply with a good guide and because it adds detail when enlarged. What is bad about that? I really don't know anything... Y not? JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:37, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you look at most equipment images, they are NOT resized, so the non-AA look will stay. As we should not say "this image should be replaced with a version without AA exept if it is small" the images should have the advice to have AA JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:45, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

In that sense, all your ideas should win every yg thread, since you obviously think you have better reasons or you wouldn't go put that in the discussion. Therefore, your reasoning of consensus being support is nonsense. bad_fetus^talk 17:01, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

U don't understand me. I am just saying i think the list of reasons i have is "stronger" than just "it is useless because all large images are scaled when they are used in a page". I am DEFINETELY not saying i own and my reasons outweigh everyone whatever i say. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 18:29, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

I understand you perfectly well, I'm just saying that your opinion is biased right now, and I was saying why. I never said that you are claiming that your reasons are better because you are the one saying it. bad_fetus^talk 18:52, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Google translate sucks once more... What is biased? JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 20:12, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

To be biased is to allow your opinions to affect your actions. As far as I can tell, the arguments given by Psycho were strong enough to have several other people oppose, so I believe the consensus would be oppose. However, I did not see the proposition to make an official anti-aliased transperncy guide when I opposed, which could be added without discussion anyways. Riblet 15 21:44, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'll ask LDP if he wants to move his guide to somewhere, and if he wants that.(it is his guide, he might wanna keep it for himself) JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:01, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

He is ok, but we don't know if it is allowed. C below. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:09, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psycho. bad_fetus^talk 17:01, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

?Reasoning please? JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 18:34, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

He doesn't need to give a reason. ʞo oɔ 18:37, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

In case you weren't aware, that was an April Fool's joke.

Chiafriend 12

Loon is best buttlord 19:26, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - AA hugely improves any image. @Psycho, you're right, but I click on every thumbnailed image to see the bigger version. Fsw e1 07:39, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

Finally someone who does show he knows something of images

JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 11:56, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

What, because he agrees with you?

ʞo oɔ 12:02, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

Ye...

JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 14:16, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

Lool

User:LordDarkPhantom/Signature 15:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I have a few reasons and suggestions. I don't see why we should be advised to go AA or non-AA. Both of them has pros and cons and you should your own choice, so I do support that AA should not be downtrodden, but not mandatory. I will add a pros and cons list at the top. Users should just be told what the better one is for certain things, but not forced to either AA or non-AA. User:LordDarkPhantom/Signature 16:28, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

I changed some things of the pro/con list. Things i changed: [5] JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:43, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

No, the outlines do look more blurry. User:LordDarkPhantom/Signature 16:45, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

When AA images are resized, it doesn't look blurry imo. this is not what i call blurry, but this is more blurry imo. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 17:24, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

You compared two different things, at two different sizes, so how can you draw a fair conclusion? User:LordDarkPhantom/Signature 15:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I did that to show that non-aa images can get blurry([6]) and aa images can not, even when resized([7]) JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 12:53, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Removed the thing of "Harder to add transparency to curved objects" because i have experience with both styles, and curved things are exactly as hard as not-curved things. That is because everything on runescape is angular[1], so all corners have to be clicked and you're done. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 03:18, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Well you can add pixel perfect transparency onto non-AA images which would make it more accurate, especially on the curves? User:LordDarkPhantom/Signature 15:58, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

You mean what made the edges of this image's first version so round? No, that shouldn't be done imo, as that is not what it is like in game. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 12:53, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Make Transparency guide and angle guide official

I think these two guides should be made official, at something like RuneScape:Image guides/Transparency and RuneScape:Image guides/Angles. This is because these guides help people increase quality of the images, which helps the wiki too. Please put comments about this below, and comments about the advice using AA or not above. Thanks. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 16:09, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose making them official guides - They're not important enough for that. If you were to make them a subpage of RS:IMP or RS:ALLIMAGES or RS:IM, though, I wouldn't complain. --Liquid^Talk 16:47, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

Making them a sub page of RS:IMP is making it official. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk

08:16, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Support - As a subpage of an official image related project. Note the word official. 222 ^talk 05:21, October 11, 2010 (UTC) Neutral - These guides are quite helpful and have great potential, but I needed the help of two people in-game (Joey and LDP) to fully understand the transparency guide. Fsw e1 16:41, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - As for the transparency guide, its not our duty to teach people how to use photoshop/gimp. For the angle guide, its really overcomplicating things. Its easy to take a perfectly fine picture of anything in RS without even using an orb of oculus. If someone wants to shoot higher than that, no one will stop them, but making a guide like this "official" could easily intimidate some editors and make them think taking images for the wiki is more bureaucratic and difficult than it really is. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk 08:33, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psycho bad_fetus^talk 14:06, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - It's not needed. It should be for volunteers, and for those who wish to do so. We shouldn't put rules on it.

Bonziiznob ^Talk

03:31, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I just thought that a lot of stuff in the angle guide could be put in Orb of oculus/Tips http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk 08:17, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

I added it, but it may need improvement. JOEYTJE50 TALK pull my finger 09:55, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Request closure - Discussion has died, and none of these proposals have any consensus. 222 ^talk 12:14, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - There is insufficient consensus to implement anything. --Liquid^Talk 02:47, January 29, 2011 (UTC)