A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Image enlargement software



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 15th 14, 09:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Image enlargement software

In article , Oregonian Haruspex
wrote:

it depends why you're enlarging it and what you want to do with the
result. if it's to be printed, let the printer do it.


That is the easiest way, but it approaches using Photoshop as the worst
way.


First, this is highly printer dependent.

Second, Photoshop gives you plenty of options when it comes to image resizing.


yep.

keep in mind that floyd has never actually used photoshop.
  #12  
Old October 15th 14, 09:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Image enlargement software

nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

What's currently the best way to enlarge an image with interpolation?

it depends why you're enlarging it and what you want to do with the
result. if it's to be printed, let the printer do it.


That is the easiest way, but it approaches using Photoshop as the worst
way.


nope. the printer designers know far more about what is best than you
do and photoshop is quite good at scaling.


Got any more funny stories?

Printer manufacturers and Adobe are about equal... and
are near the botton of the list when it comes to
resizing images for printing.

your repeated jabs at photoshop not only show how ignorant you are
about photoshop and what it can do, but just how jealous you are of
quality software you can't use.


Fanboi-ism is wonderful for you perhaps.

more importantly, it's not possible to tell the difference without
pixel peeping and even then, probably not. nobody is going to look at a
print and say "you used the printer to scale it."


That is probably true for anything you've ever actually printed!

Assuming you've ever taken any photographs to begin with...

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #13  
Old October 15th 14, 09:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Image enlargement software

On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:47 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

What's currently the best way to enlarge an image with interpolation?


it depends why you're enlarging it and what you want to do with the
result. if it's to be printed, let the printer do it.


So you are saying that currently the best way to enlarge an image with
interpolation is getting someone else to do it. Now, say that 'someone
else' approached you and asked you what is currently the best way to
enlarge an image with interpolation, what would your answer be?

Are there some tools around which are better than others?


yes.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #14  
Old October 15th 14, 10:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Image enlargement software

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

What's currently the best way to enlarge an image with interpolation?

it depends why you're enlarging it and what you want to do with the
result. if it's to be printed, let the printer do it.

That is the easiest way, but it approaches using Photoshop as the worst
way.


nope. the printer designers know far more about what is best than you
do and photoshop is quite good at scaling.


Got any more funny stories?

Printer manufacturers and Adobe are about equal... and
are near the botton of the list when it comes to
resizing images for printing.


not as funny as that one!

do you seriously believe that printer makers and adobe know nothing
about resizing?

your repeated jabs at photoshop not only show how ignorant you are
about photoshop and what it can do, but just how jealous you are of
quality software you can't use.


Fanboi-ism is wonderful for you perhaps.


nothing fanboi about it.

you have no idea what photoshop can do and must resort to bashing it to
justify not being able to use it.

more importantly, it's not possible to tell the difference without
pixel peeping and even then, probably not. nobody is going to look at a
print and say "you used the printer to scale it."


That is probably true for anything you've ever actually printed!

Assuming you've ever taken any photographs to begin with...


plenty, but as usual, you're resorting to personal attacks rather than
discussing the topic.
  #15  
Old October 15th 14, 10:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Image enlargement software

On 2014-10-15 20:27:05 +0000, Alfred Molon said:

In article , Mayayana says...

In any case, it will all boil down to adding in extra pixels
to enlarge the image. The only difference I know of is in
how many neighboring pixels are taken into account to
decide the color value of a given added pixel.


But (probably) some softwares are better at preserving edge sharpness,
from what I remember. Some special algorithms to recognise edges and
reconstruct/resharpen them when resizing. I believe I read this
somewhere, but I can't remember where.


I use Photoshop CC (2014) and it does a reasonable job of enlarging
within limitations. That said when I am looking to enlarge to sizes
beyond 13''x19'' from an original, or if I want to enlarge from a crop,
or from a smaller original I use OnOne Software's "Perfect Resize".
http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/resize9/

So here is a 9.4''x13.2'' finished PSD which I opened in OnOne "Perfect
Resize" to enlarge to 21.36''x30''.

The original 9.4''x13.2'' @ 25% open in photoshop:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_969.jpg

The "Perfect Resize" workspace showing new enlargement settings to
21.36''x30''.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_967.jpg

The enlarged version in Photoshop at 25%:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_968.jpg
--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #16  
Old October 15th 14, 11:32 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Image enlargement software

On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 03:02:47 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

What's currently the best way to enlarge an image with interpolation?


it depends why you're enlarging it and what you want to do with the
result. if it's to be printed, let the printer do it.

Are there some tools around which are better than others?


yes.


I've already replied to this but I've finally worked out that when you
wrote 'printer' you meant printer as a machine and not as a person.

If you are after a high quality print, leaving it to the printer to
enlarge the image is definitely not the best way.

First, many printer drivers do nothing fancy in the way of pixel
interpolation and all you may get is simple pixel interpolation. This
is a particularly bad way to handle edges and sharp transitions within
the image in that it scales up the softness of the original smaller
image. That might not matter when the image is small but it probably
will matter when the image is enlarged.

Second, once you have fired off an image to the printer to be enlarged
you have lost any opportunity to follow the enlargement with further
retouching, sharpening etc. It's better to enlarge the image to it's
final size in pixels at a relatively early stage in the work flow so
that you have a better hope that what you see is what you will get.
With most printers this is 300 pixels/dots per inch but Epson use 360
dots/pixels inch.

[I expect that at this stage someone will be bursting to have a go at
me about the difference between dots and pixels. The distinction is
becoming increasingly confused by printers which have a native
resolution of (say) 360 print-cells/inch and the ability to print
(say) 64 dots, each of a different color, in each print cell. When you
add to this the ability of print drivers to mix and match and even
change print colors within print cells the connection between print
dots and pixels becomes even more tenuous.]
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #17  
Old October 16th 14, 12:09 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Image enlargement software

Eric Stevens wrote:
[I expect that at this stage someone will be bursting to have a go at
me about ...


Your entire article was dead on correct.

The point is: don't send an image to a print driver that
is not already re-sampled and sharpened at the printer's
native PPI.

At least not for the best possible results. But then
again if it is being re-sampled using something like the
Abobe bicubic filter, is may not make much difference...

There are some very good articles by or about Professor
Nicolas Robidoux at Laurentian University in Sudbury, ON
Canada on optimal filters for resampling images. A
Google search would be worth while for anyone interested
in where the bleeding edge is at today.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #18  
Old October 16th 14, 12:23 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Oregonian Haruspex
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default Image enlargement software

On 2014-10-15 20:54:54 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

So you are saying that currently the best way to enlarge an image with
interpolation is getting someone else to do it. Now, say that 'someone
else' approached you and asked you what is currently the best way to
enlarge an image with interpolation, what would your answer be?


Listen, before the ink shoots out of the nozzles the printer is going
to be doing its own transforms in both the geometric and color domains
anyway, and it's just possible that the fellas who designed its
mechanism and firmware knew what they were doing, no? I mean it's also
possible (but not likely) that things might not turn out that great,
but you can't just take it as a given that in-printer interpolation is
worse than doing it yourself, because doing enlargement yourself in
software is no guarantee that this combined with the printer's own
transforms that it ALWAYS applies as a natural part of the printing
process won't make things worse in the end.

Each printer has its own character and you have to figure out the best
workflow afresh if you change printers.

  #19  
Old October 16th 14, 01:12 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Image enlargement software

On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:23:11 -0700, Oregonian Haruspex
wrote:

On 2014-10-15 20:54:54 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

So you are saying that currently the best way to enlarge an image with
interpolation is getting someone else to do it. Now, say that 'someone
else' approached you and asked you what is currently the best way to
enlarge an image with interpolation, what would your answer be?


Listen, before the ink shoots out of the nozzles the printer is going
to be doing its own transforms in both the geometric and color domains
anyway, and it's just possible that the fellas who designed its
mechanism and firmware knew what they were doing, no? I mean it's also
possible (but not likely) that things might not turn out that great,
but you can't just take it as a given that in-printer interpolation is
worse than doing it yourself, because doing enlargement yourself in
software is no guarantee that this combined with the printer's own
transforms that it ALWAYS applies as a natural part of the printing
process won't make things worse in the end.

Each printer has its own character and you have to figure out the best
workflow afresh if you change printers.


Hopefully, if you have set things up correctly yourself, the printer
has to do the minimum of adjustment and if your color management is
correct you should end up with what you saw on the screen.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #20  
Old October 16th 14, 02:32 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Image enlargement software

Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
On 2014-10-15 20:54:54 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

So you are saying that currently the best way to enlarge an image with
interpolation is getting someone else to do it. Now, say that 'someone
else' approached you and asked you what is currently the best way to
enlarge an image with interpolation, what would your answer be?


Listen, before the ink shoots out of the nozzles the
printer is going to be doing its own transforms in both
the geometric and color domains anyway, and it's just
possible that the fellas who designed its mechanism and
firmware knew what they were doing, no?


Oh, they do know what they are doing. They are designing
printers. They are virtually all very poor at computer
software. Their drivers aren't the best, and the internal
computer that drives the hardware usually has a horrible
human interface.

There are people who specialize in image software. Some
of them specialize in only the development of image
re-sampling software. They produce commercial products
and sometimes academic papers too.

It is a well known fact that printer manufacturers use,
almost universally, something that is just one step
ahead of what is called "Nearest-neighbor
interpolation". They do not actually generate "pixels"
for the print engine, they produce dithered lines.

But the print driver, even if it used a great algorithm,
has two problems. The biggest one is that you cannot
preview the image and therefore cannot resharpen it by
inspection to suit the new pixel dimensions. If there
is no other reason, that one is enough to never ever
send an image to the print driver that has not been
first resampled and then resharpened to exactly match
the PPI rate of the printer.

But the other problem is that selection of an algorithm
is not really possible. The driver may be able to use
something different for up sampling than for down
sampling, but it cannot know if the image is text, line
drawings or photographs with busy detail or photographs
with only smooth detail.

One size simply cannot fit all images...

I mean it's
also possible (but not likely) that things might not
turn out that great, but you can't just take it as a
given that in-printer interpolation is worse than doing
it yourself, because doing enlargement yourself in
software is no guarantee that this combined with the
printer's own transforms that it ALWAYS applies as a
natural part of the printing process won't make things
worse in the end.


Unless of course you have some modicum of knowledge
about what you are doing. Experience is nice, but
so is Google. Anyone can learn enough in a couple
days to do a vastly more appropriate job than simply
letting the print driver handle it.

Each printer has its own character and you have to
figure out the best workflow afresh if you change
printers.


--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Image software [email protected] Digital Photography 22 February 23rd 08 07:47 AM
Best software for image enhancement? SS Digital Photography 2 June 9th 07 12:55 AM
Image enlargement software Alfred Molon Digital Photography 9 November 22nd 06 05:49 AM
Different image processing software RichA Digital SLR Cameras 24 June 11th 05 02:33 AM
New Photo Enlargement Software Gives Cell Phone Photos Better PrintResults Donald Henderson Digital Photography 5 April 21st 05 05:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.