[poppler] Scaling factor and placement accuracy

[pqt at LEFerguson.com]

Thomas, thanks.

>If anyone is able to develop a pixel scissors I would take a deeper look into it
>(and would nominate him to get a Nobel Prize J ), in the meantime I would
>advice to take a much higher resolution when render it to an image (at least 300 dpi)

I'll put that on my list.  As soon as I finish up Maxwell's Demon (virtual of course) I think I can put him to work splitting pixels as well sorting molecules.

But maybe you can advise as to resolution.  I am displaying on a 1920x1080 monitor.  The goal is to receive back from poppler a QImage that doesn't have to be resized to display in a QLabel.  I'm calculating the 141+ based on the definition of the field to yield a specific pixel dimension of the result (and it does); I didn't even realize this was intended as dpi until I saw the units in the code (I just inverted the math based on the definition of 72's, etc.)  The dot pitch on that monitor is about 102 dpi, but the PDF is … well, who knows how Musescore specified it.

Am I thinking of this incorrectly -- won't I get the best quality (and best performance) letting Poppler render exactly the pixel dimensions I will display on the screen?

Thanks again,

Linwood
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/poppler/attachments/20170327/4f15be8d/attachment.html>