Forums > MobyGames > Screenshot size for old Console and Computers
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95187) on 7/11/2010 10:50 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Kaminari wrote--]The auto-resize looks bad though. Instead of simply upscaling screenshots x2, it applies an ugly bilinear filter which ruins the quality of the original picture. [/Q --end Kaminari wrote--] It's your browser doing that, though, not the site. :) It's supposedly possible to change at least Firefox to use nearest-neighbor scaling instead, which would look much better...but I've never gotten it to work.
Servo (57070) on 7/12/2010 8:22 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start 雷堂承太朗 -djsw- wrote--] It's your browser doing that, though, not the site. :) It's supposedly possible to change at least Firefox to use nearest-neighbor scaling instead, which would look much better...but I've never gotten it to work. [/Q --end 雷堂承太朗 -djsw- wrote--]I've been trying to find a way to switch Firefox to nearest-neighbor scaling and couldn't figure it out either! I think that may actually not be currently supported...
Havoc Crow (29859) on 7/13/2010 7:10 AM · Permalink · Report
Allegedly, you can fix it in Firefox by adding the line img { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; } to the userContent.css file. (I tried that, and it didn't work, and it's not just me.)
There were several discussions and bug reports among the Mozilla community with regards to fixing this, but they all went nowhere.
So there you have it.
Kaminari (1081) on 7/24/2010 7:43 PM · Permalink · Report
Yeah, disabling bilinear filtering has never worked in Moz.
Besides, it's not something specific to Firefox: when you browse MG without logging in, small screenshots are by default automatically upscaled with bilinear filtering on Firefox, Chrome and IE. Just check for yourself with the following link:
http://mobygames.com/game/turbografx-cd/sorcerian/screenshots/gameShotId,451868/
Macs Black (80288) on 9/15/2010 4:43 AM · Permalink · Report
Just reviving this to say that I just went from Firefox 2.x to 3.6.9 today, to check if this dreadful blurring effect/filtering was gone. I was still using that old browser mainly because of Mobygames. It was still present, but they finally added the aforementioned fix. I created a userContent.css file inside the chrome folder of the profile directory, and added the following lines:
img[src$=".gif"] { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; -ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor; }
img[src$=".png"] { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; -ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor; }
...and the filtering was gone, thank [deity of your preference]. I think it became an option since version 3.6. I read on the bug report that it's something that could be added by the webmaster, without the need of this customization.
Foxhack (32100) on 9/15/2010 4:53 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Macs Black wrote--]Just reviving this to say that I just went from Firefox 2.x to 3.6.9 today, to check if this dreadful blurring effect/filtering was gone. I was still using that old browser mainly because of Mobygames. It was still present, but they finally added the aforementioned fix. I created a userContent.css file inside the chrome folder of the profile directory, and added the following lines:
img[src$=".gif"] { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; -ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor; }
img[src$=".png"] { image-rendering: -moz-crisp-edges; -ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor; }
...and the filtering was gone, thank [deity of your preference]. I think it became an option since version 3.6. I read on the bug report that it's something that could be added by the webmaster, without the need of this customization. [/Q --end Macs Black wrote--]... So why the hell don't they add this TO THE PROGRAM INSTEAD OF USING A CSS HACK?!
Havoc Crow (29859) on 9/16/2010 4:40 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Foxhack wrote--]... So why the hell don't they add this TO THE PROGRAM INSTEAD OF USING A CSS HACK?! [/Q --end Foxhack wrote--]
If I recall, the reason they didn't want to add this to the settings panel was because, supposedly, very few people would have a use for it.
Foxhack (32100) on 9/16/2010 6:01 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start JudgeDeadd wrote--] [Q2 --start Foxhack wrote--]... So why the hell don't they add this TO THE PROGRAM INSTEAD OF USING A CSS HACK?! [/Q2 --end Foxhack wrote--]
If I recall, the reason they didn't want to add this to the settings panel was because, supposedly, very few people would have a use for it. [/Q --end JudgeDeadd wrote--]In other words, bullshit.
Is it even accessible via the about:config screen? If not, what's wrong with adding it there?