• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Photoshop & Macbook Retina display

Explorer ,
Jul 05, 2012 Jul 05, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Does Photoshop support the new Macbook Pro Retina display?

Views

54.2K

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Adobe Employee , Dec 11, 2012 Dec 11, 2012

The Photoshop CS6 13.0.2 update is now available free to all Mac users. It provides support for Retina displays.

Photoshop 13.0.2 update for CS6

Votes

Translate

Translate
Adobe
New Here ,
Jul 20, 2012 Jul 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Noel Carboni wrote:

Information in that article flies in the face of what's stated as observed here

Some of the screen grabs clearly show Nearest Neighbor interpolation (e.g., the Adobe Open dialog).

Um, there would be very little to no difference between NN and bilinear scaling when doing a straight 2x upscale (all the 4 pixels for bi-linear would in fact be the same original pixel). You could get a smoother upscale with more advanced algorithms. The most of 'blurriness', comes from the image being anti-aliased at the original resolution, and this is then re-scaled up; BUT there are different scale-up algorithms used depending on the display method.

Screen Shot 2012-07-20 at 15.18.09.png Screen Shot 2012-07-20 at 15.18.36.png Screen Shot 2012-07-20 at 15.18.55.png

These three snapshots show the same image (http://cgt256.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/layout_grid.gif) displayed by 3 applications:

Chrome (Retina aware for text, but images are rendered upscaled) Safari (Also Retina aware, images are also upscaled) and Xee (completely unaware of Retina). The scaling used seems to be lanczos for Safari (either safari knows how to display images nicer, or drawImage does the magic itself) but it is Nearest Neighbor (or bilinear) for Xee (which would seem to confirm that for unaware applications this is what's happening). Chrome uses 3D compositing (with bicubic scaling), that causes the image to be oh-so-very-fuzzy.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Jul 20, 2012 Jul 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

p88h wrote:

Um, there would be very little to no difference between NN and bilinear scaling when doing a straight 2x upscale (all the 4 pixels for bi-linear would in fact be the same original pixel).

Respectfully, that's not true at all.

You can do the experiment yourself - make 3 copies of a small document and upsample two of them to 200% in each dimension using the two different methods, which are available in the Image - Image Size dialog.  Here, I've done another example.

UpsamplingComparison.jpg

-Noel

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jul 20, 2012 Jul 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hm, ok, my bad - I only considered a very trivial bilinear upsampling I guess

It's certainly possible to place the 2x2 windows in a slightly shifted way so that it looks better when doing exact 200% upscale; sorry for introducing confusion.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines