Digital BW, The Print

any thoughts on whether it's better to use Bicubic Smoother or Genuine 
Fractals (PrintPro) to enlarge files from a digital camera ?

The idea of course is to be able to print larger images at the epson's 
favoured 360dpi 

thanks
Frank

Read the archives around mid Aug under "Genuine Fractals"

> From: frankg_photo <fh.gross@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 19:06:38 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] 'up-res' files - Bicubic Smoother or GF?
> 
> any thoughts on whether it's better to use Bicubic Smoother or Genuine
> Fractals (PrintPro) to enlarge files from a digital camera ?
> 
> The idea of course is to be able to print larger images at the epson's
> favoured 360dpi 
> 
> thanks
> Frank

Steve,
Thanks for that reminder, I don't think I could take another month of  
that. :)
Mark

On Oct 7, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> Read the archives around mid Aug under "Genuine Fractals"
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Well I think I got it right this time after having screwed up earlier in the
week (or the end of last week)!

> From: Mark Savoia <mark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:24:08 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 'up-res' files - Bicubic Smoother or GF?
> 
> Steve,
> Thanks for that reminder, I don't think I could take another month of
> that. :)
> Mark
> 
> On Oct 7, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
>> Read the archives around mid Aug under "Genuine Fractals"
>>

Mark Savoia wrote:


> Thanks for that reminder, I don't think I could take another month of  
> that. :)

Then why ask essentially the same question again?

The answer of course is "it depends." One algorithm is going to have an 
advantage over the other when run against a dataset that has certain 
characteristics. Genuine Fractals seems (to me, on average) to do best 
on images with a lot of high frequency information; conversely, bicubic 
algorithms tend to alias more easily on such inputs even when they are 
smoothed, and when smoothed seem to have trouble preserving the highest 
frequency information present in a set of data. OTOH, bicubics tend to 
process gradients and other low frequency information with more 
reliability than I'm used to seeing from GF.

Neither algorithm is considered to be very ideal for imagery at this 
point, and both are widely considered to be suboptimal for most imaging 
applications. If you have both, why don't you try them both against your 
image of interest and report back to us? If you lack one or both, just 
don't go there unless you feel a need to live in the middle ages; get 
yourself a program that supports lanczos and s-spline interpolation.

-- 
Jeff Medkeff
Eagle River, Alaska

Jeff Medkeff wrote:
> Mark Savoia wrote:



>>Thanks for that reminder, I don't think I could take another month of  
>>that. :)

> Then why ask essentially the same question again?

Doh! Sorry, I completely misinterpreted what you were saying there. 
Sorry for my non-sequitur.

-- 
Jeff Medkeff
Eagle River, Alaska

He didn't...

> From: Jeff Medkeff <medkeff@...>
 
> 
> Mark Savoia wrote:
> 
> 
>> Thanks for that reminder, I don't think I could take another month of
>> that. :)
> 
> Then why ask essentially the same question again?
>

Frank, you've inadvertantly stirred up more bandwidth waste than you
wanted. 

Some easy answers, maybe they work for you:

1) It's often said that bicubic in CS is reliably better for "general
use" than Genuine Fractals, but this may compare bicubic to old GF
releases (just a suspicion). 

2) To compare bicubic (which you have if you have CS) with Lancosz and
a variety of similar applications, the cheapest way is with Qimage.
http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/ 

Qimage suffers constant updates and it's not intuitive. The front end
is user-unfriendly but the documentation's well written. It should be
much more popular. Using Qimage and Lancosz I've had amazingly good
results at 18" with scans of 35mm negs that look terrible as
"straight" inkjet prints at 11". Beyond my comprehension :-)


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "frankg_photo"
<fh.gross@s...> wrote:

>
> any thoughts on whether it's better to use Bicubic Smoother or Genuine 
> Fractals (PrintPro) to enlarge files from a digital camera ?
> 
> The idea of course is to be able to print larger images at the epson's 
> favoured 360dpi 
> 
> thanks
> Frank
>

Here we go. Please check the archives and stop this thread again.

On Oct 7, 2005, at 4:13 PM, djon43 wrote:

>
> Frank, you've inadvertantly stirred up more bandwidth waste than you
> wanted.
>
> Some easy answers, maybe they work for you:
>
> 1) It's often said that bicubic in CS is reliably better for "general
> use" than Genuine Fractals, but this may compare bicubic to old GF
> releases (just a suspicion).
>
> 2) To compare bicubic (which you have if you have CS) with Lancosz and
> a variety of similar applications, the cheapest way is with Qimage.
> http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/
>
> Qimage suffers constant updates and it's not intuitive. The front end
> is user-unfriendly but the documentation's well written. It should be
> much more popular. Using Qimage and Lancosz I've had amazingly good
> results at 18" with scans of 35mm negs that look terrible as
> "straight" inkjet prints at 11". Beyond my comprehension :-)
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "frankg_photo"
> <fh.gross@s...> wrote:
> >
> > any thoughts on whether it's better to use Bicubic Smoother or  
> Genuine
> > Fractals (PrintPro) to enlarge files from a digital camera ?
> >
> > The idea of course is to be able to print larger images at the  
> epson's
> > favoured 360dpi
> >
> > thanks
> > Frank
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you  
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by  
> visiting this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines�  
> in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE  
> �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL  
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital wedding photography	Learn digital photography	Digital  
> photography college
> Digital photography	Digital photography web site	Digital  
> photography course
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
>
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

OK sorry folks this is obviously a hornets nest or at least a bore 
since it has been rehashed several times over. In my defence i did do a 
search but didnt come up with the August thread.

Anyway it seems that different strokes for different folks and it's not 
clear cut. I have learned though that spline (Powerzoom) and lanczos 
(Irfanview or Qimage) seem to be the more modern and more acceptable 
solutions than GF or Bicubic, or SI pro 2. 

However it also seems that different programs are best for different 
images - depending on the nature of the image - but it isnt clear how 
one can discern beforehand which to use,  and itd be a drag to have to  
use all 4 or 5 program/plugin options to see which is best on each 
individual image.

Since the thread isnt welcome, if you have anything further to say on 
this please feel free to email offlist

thanks
Frank

Hey Frank it's not that it isn't welcome, it's just one of those topics that
comes up repeatedly.  Take a look at the August dialogue and do NOT be shy
to come back with any further questions you might have following that.


> From: frankg_photo <fh.gross@...>
.

> 
> Since the thread isnt welcome, if you have anything further to say on
> this please feel free to email offlist
> 
> thanks
> Frank

frankg_photo wrote:


> I have learned though that spline 

All of those you mentioned - lanczos, GF, Bicubic, and SI pro - are splines.

What is powerzoom? Is there a website for it? I'm always looking for 
sources of interpolation software that I don't have to write myself.

-- 
Jeff Medkeff
Eagle River, Alaska

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Medkeff 
<medkeff@g...> wrote:
>
> frankg_photo wrote:
> 
> 
> > I have learned though that spline 
> 
> All of those you mentioned - lanczos, GF, Bicubic, and SI pro - are 
splines.
> 
> What is powerzoom? Is there a website for it? I'm always looking 
for 
> sources of interpolation software that I don't have to write myself.
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Medkeff
> Eagle River, Alaska
>
Here's a trial 
http://www.trulyphotomagic.com/shortcut/site/content.php?
page=ourproducts§ion=product_serie_info&cat=3

> > What is powerzoom? Is there a website for it? I'm always looking 
> for 
> > sources of interpolation software that I don't have to write myself.
> > 


> >
> Here's a trial 
> http://www.trulyphotomagic.com/shortcut/site/content.php?
> page=ourproducts§ion=product_serie_info&cat=3
>

sorry slip of the tongue (lapse of consciousness) - its PhotoZoom Pro 
not Powerzoom pro

Don't patronize Frank for asking a legitimate question. We don't all
hang on every word or thread.  

John Kelly
Albuquerque


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> Hey Frank it's not that it isn't welcome, it's just one of those
topics that
> comes up repeatedly.  Take a look at the August dialogue and do NOT
be shy

> to come back with any further questions you might have following that.
> 
> 
> > From: frankg_photo <fh.gross@s...>
> .
> > 
> > Since the thread isnt welcome, if you have anything further to say on
> > this please feel free to email offlist
> > 
> > thanks
> > Frank
>

No one was being patronizing.  The question was welcome and he was pointed
to an extensive discussion of the topic.  The point was merely that the
existing discourse should be consumed rather than asking people to repeat
it.  I don't see what your problem is.

> From: djon43 <djon43@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 03:26:01 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: 'up-res' files - Bicubic Smoother or GF?
> 
> 
> Don't patronize Frank for asking a legitimate question. We don't all
> hang on every word or thread.
> 
> John Kelly
> Albuquerque
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>> 
>> Hey Frank it's not that it isn't welcome, it's just one of those
> topics that
>> comes up repeatedly.  Take a look at the August dialogue and do NOT
> be shy
>> to come back with any further questions you might have following that.
>> 
>> 
>>> From: frankg_photo <fh.gross@s...>
>> .
>>> 
>>> Since the thread isnt welcome, if you have anything further to say on
>>> this please feel free to email offlist
>>> 
>>> thanks
>>> Frank