Program to make low-res image files look sharper

[Robert Montgomery]

A number years I heard about a program that makes low-res image files
look sharper, by simulating pixels, so that the files can look sharp
when printed at a large size.

Does anybody know the name of program?

[Robert Montgomery]

I forgot to mention that the program should be Mac-compatible.

Robert

[Colin.D]

Genuine Fractals is reputed to be able to do this, also some advanced
algorithms like Lanczos, and resampling as incorporated in Qimage, a
specialist printing program.

None of them increase detail, the manufactured pixels are derived from
existing pixels, but the way they are derived can influence the look of
the finished image to some extent. Best is to retake the image if possible.

Colin D.

[Roy G]

"Robert Montgomery" <info-...@northern-data-tech.net> wrote in message
news:yCSHl.25000$PH1.1263@edtnps82...

I think it has to be a TV program called CSI. They can do real magic with
digital images.

Roy G

[Robert Montgomery]

Thanks.

I know that none of those programs increase detail. What I want is to
smooth jagged edges and avoid the halo effects of sharpening.

Anyone know how Genuine Fractals compares to Alien Skin's Blow-Up?

Robert

[Robert Montgomery]

Joel wrote:

> I don't have the original message and hope you won't mind me quoting
> yours.
>
> - The name of the program is called Photoshop either CS2, CS3, and I think
> CS4 can do it too. You can find under Image Resize option but chose
> Percentage and other option instead.

I own Photoshop CS3 and I can't fine "Image Resize" in the program and I
can't find where I would change the image size by percentage.
>
> - It will help to improve a larger print but not making the blurry image
> looks sharper which is part of Sharpen and similar. I don't do sharpen
> besides messing to gain little experience to know much about it.
>
> - And to deal with low-rez image you often need more than making it look
> sharper (often make it looks worse), like you may want to edit in 16-bit
> mode instead of 8-bit.

So in other words the programs like Alien Skin's Blow-Up and On One's
Genuine Fractals are unnecessary for blowing up images while minimizing
the dark outlines and halo effect that are produced by blowing up?

> And I hope this won't be another suicide letter <bg>

Huh?

Robert

[John J]

Robert Montgomery wrote:

> I own Photoshop CS3 and I can't fine "Image Resize" in the program and I
> can't find where I would change the image size by percentage.

Image -> Image Size -> then click on the little down-arrow by 'pixels'
in the first row.

[Robert Montgomery]

Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
> Robert Montgomery <info-...@northern-data-tech.net> found these unused
> words:

>
>> Joel wrote:
>>> - The name of the program is called Photoshop either CS2, CS3, and I think
>>> CS4 can do it too. You can find under Image Resize option but chose
>>> Percentage and other option instead.
>> I own Photoshop CS3 and I can't fine "Image Resize" in the program and I
>> can't find where I would change the image size by percentage.

>> Robert
>
> I believe it's "Image Size" in the "Image" menu drop down and for the rest
> Press "F1" for instructions on the tool.

Thanks, John and F. A.

I tried enlarging an image file by percentage and saved it. I also tried
enlarging the original image file by pixels and saved it.

I printed both files, which ended up being the same size (118 megabytes)
and the same resolution (300 dpi).

I printed the images. I couldn't tell any difference between the printed
results.

Robert

[John J]

The results would be the same. It's all about the actual pixels, the
pixel count (area formula).

[Robert Montgomery]

But I thought that Joel wrote that increasing an image size in Photoshop
by percentage would be better than increasing image size by pixels, and
do the same thing as enlarging by Genuine Fractals. Perhaps I
misunderstood, though, because his writing (below) wasas unclear:

> - The name of the program is called Photoshop either CS2, CS3, and I think
> CS4 can do it too. You can find under Image Resize option but chose
> Percentage and other option instead.
>

> - It will help to improve a larger print but not making the blurry image
> looks sharper which is part of Sharpen and similar.

Robert

[Fred]

> But I thought that Joel wrote that increasing an image size in Photoshop
> by percentage would be better than increasing image size by pixels, and do
> the same thing as enlarging by Genuine Fractals. Perhaps I misunderstood,
> though, because his writing (below) wasas unclear:
>
>

> Robert

You can try enlarging the image in small percentages (10%) till you reach
the desired size.
This should keep the edges a bit sharper.
You can also make an action to do that.

Fred

[Robert Montgomery]

Joel wrote:
> Robert Montgomery <info-...@northern-data-tech.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>

>>> The results would be the same. It's all about the actual pixels, the
>>> pixel count (area formula).
>> But I thought that Joel wrote that increasing an image size in Photoshop
>> by percentage would be better than increasing image size by pixels, and
>> do the same thing as enlarging by Genuine Fractals. Perhaps I
>> misunderstood, though, because his writing (below) wasas unclear:
>

> You should learn to blame yourself for not smart enough to THINK about the
> whole thing.

No; I should not blame myself. Thinking about the whole thing is useless
without experimenting, because thinking is merely academic and nebulous
due to variable, whereas experimenting produces tangible results and
proof. You implied that same thought in the same letter as the criticism
that you wrote above:

> what I am trying to say it depends on
> different situation, different technique.

That's why I was smart not to believe whatever I read without testing
the scenario myself.

Robert

[Robert Montgomery]

Robert Montgomery wrote:
> Joel wrote:
>> Robert Montgomery <info-...@northern-data-tech.net> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>>> The results would be the same. It's all about the actual pixels, the
>>>> pixel count (area formula).
>>> But I thought that Joel wrote that increasing an image size in
>>> Photoshop by percentage would be better than increasing image size by
>>> pixels, and do the same thing as enlarging by Genuine Fractals.
>>> Perhaps I misunderstood, though, because his writing (below) wasas
>>> unclear:
>>
>> You should learn to blame yourself for not smart enough to THINK
>> about the
>> whole thing.
>
> No; I should not blame myself. Thinking about the whole thing is useless
> without experimenting, because thinking is merely academic and nebulous

> due to variables, whereas experimenting produces tangible results and

> proof. You implied that same thought in the same letter as the criticism
> that you wrote above:
>
>> what I am trying to say it depends on
>> different situation, different technique.
>
> That's why I was smart not to believe whatever I read without testing
> the scenario myself.
>
> Robert

So it is YOU � not me � who is not smart enough.

Robert

[John J]

Joel gave his solution to up-sizing and it was dead wrong.

Such advise happens all the time.

Joel is wrong.

So be it.