Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Genuine Fractals

0 views
Skip to first unread message

van dark

unread,
Apr 21, 2009, 4:29:15 AM4/21/09
to
I should like to instal and use a Genuine Fractals on my PC. Is Genuine
Fractals able to run in Windows 2000 and Photoshop 7.0?
Thanx for reply

David Ruether

unread,
Apr 21, 2009, 8:06:44 AM4/21/09
to

"van dark" <van....@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:gsk04v$1e53$1...@ns.felk.cvut.cz...

>I should like to instal and use a Genuine Fractals on my PC. Is Genuine Fractals able to run in Windows 2000 and Photoshop 7.0?
> Thanx for reply

Yes, it will run with Win 2000 (but I don't know about
PS-7, but with PS-7 you may not need it...;-) - and I
have a copy to sell, if interested...
--DR


whinee

unread,
Apr 21, 2009, 11:22:23 AM4/21/09
to
Genuine Fractals and its ilk do not create data that is not there. Unlike in
the movies and television you cannot magically add image details to a low
resolution original.
Many users, myself included, do not see significant differences using third
party resizing tools instead of Photoshop's built-in tools for ordinary
printing tasks.
If you are planning to try to create poster-sized images you may want to try
downloading trials of several resizing programs and compare them to PS
before buying as some of these programs are quite expensive for the single
task they perform and which you may rarely use.

Martin Brown

unread,
Apr 22, 2009, 3:22:00 AM4/22/09
to
whinee wrote:

> Genuine Fractals and its ilk do not create data that is not there.

What they can do on a good day with the right source material is produce
a larger image with less obtrusive artifacts. However, it doesn't always
work so very definitely try before you buy.

> Unlike in the movies and television you cannot magically add image
> details to a low resolution original.

The best you can ever hope for under perfect conditions is a roughly
factor of 2 to 3 improvement in resolution at the expense of introducing
certain artifacts. Most times you do not have anything remotely close to
the controlled conditions needed for this to work. The Hubble Space
Telescope is an example where signal to noise and an extremely well
determined point spread function allows this to be done.

An ordinary photo with finite depth of field issues is pretty much
impossible to process.

> Many users, myself included, do not see significant differences using
> third party resizing tools instead of Photoshop's built-in tools for
> ordinary printing tasks.

Genuine fractals can on a good day with the right source material make a
larger image containing artifacts that do not stand out to the eye.
Essentially it creates self similar scaled textures at the higher
resolution. These might not have really been present in the actual
scene, but they don't look out of place.

Most other mathematical interpolation methods tend to produce artifacts
that are aligned with the image grid structure.

> If you are planning to try to create poster-sized images you may want to
> try downloading trials of several resizing programs and compare them to
> PS before buying as some of these programs are quite expensive for the
> single task they perform and which you may rarely use.

Good advice. Do not expect miracles.

Regards,
Martin Brown

van dark

unread,
Apr 22, 2009, 5:36:14 AM4/22/09
to
Yes, thank you for your help and advice, of course. The GF is BMHO
expensive one and in addition is not running my Photoshop 7.0,
unfortunately. The S-Spline 2 is better from this view (is running in
W2K independently on Photoshop. As for the price, it´s similar one as GF.
Nice day,
rene

whinee napsal(a):

0 new messages