I don’t have an answer for you, but a suggestion: Don’t scale down the original texture more than once. If you have to scale it down, use the original size and image and scale it down by the amount you need. Each time you scale, you lose valuable pixel information and it wont be able to maintain the ‘essence’ of the image no matter what you do. If you have to scale a 50% scaled image 50% more, scale the original by 75%, or down to 25%. There is no reason that I can think of no to do this, and it is essentially the correct way to do scaling. Maybe you have something else going on forcing you to do stacked scaling, but it is always a bad idea to do so because you will always lose pixel information each time you scale.------------------------
Wut
Okay, I didn’t understand what you were saying in the op. So when you stack the scaling, the filtering is applied, but when you scale once by a large amount, it creates undesirable hard edges.
Hm. So that is interesting. I did a test myself using opengl hardware acceleration in windowed and fullscreen mode with the quality being set to best (linear) and was able to scale an image down by 75% of it’s original size and it looked great.
Using simple tests, scaling with linear quality using RenderCopy works perfectly fine on my end. I could scale it down 92% before it starts looking slightly jagged on a 96 x 103 image. I even tried scaling the width and height differently and while the aspect was ruined, it was still butter smooth. Maybe something in your SDL setup? Video card settings forcing low texture quality?------------------------
Wut
With fine grids like that you can’t expect to scale it down and it be pixel perfect or smooth. Your problem with the grid is just the nature of the beast. If you want grids, I suggest you use line & rectangle rendering instead.------------------------
Wut