Something like Genuine Fractals for GIMP?

[-Lost]

I have been using the Lanczos filter for the longest time now, but it
is not successful in converting small images, say less than < 300x300px
72dpi.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone knew of something like Genuine
Fractals for The GIMP?

I have sent an e-mail to onOne software to see how exactly Genuine
Fractals works, whether it is implemented in Photoshop Scripting or a
self-contained plug-in, in the latter case it would be available to
GIMP as well (maybe).

Of course, I would love a solution that did not cost $160.

Thanks.

--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not.

[-Lost]

Response from "-Lost" <maventhee...@techie.com>:

> I have been using the Lanczos filter for the longest time now, but
> it is not successful in converting small images, say less than <
> 300x300px 72dpi.
>
> Anyway, I was wondering if anyone knew of something like Genuine
> Fractals for The GIMP?
>
> I have sent an e-mail to onOne software to see how exactly Genuine
> Fractals works, whether it is implemented in Photoshop Scripting
> or a self-contained plug-in, in the latter case it would be
> available to GIMP as well (maybe).
>
> Of course, I would love a solution that did not cost $160.
>
> Thanks.

Sorry, it just dawned on me that I should perhaps explain what
Genuine Fractals is or EXACTLY what I am after.

Basically the resampling or conversion of a small image to its
equivalent larger image with as little loss in quality as possible.

Genuine Fractals can for example convert a 32x32 ICO into a 640x480
image with very little loss in quality. Add a touch up here and
there and you have a near perfect reproduction of that itty-bitty
icon.

You can see an example comparing Genuine Fractals to a bicubic
smoother at:

http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=2

Thanks!

[Bill Tuthill]

Lost <maventhee...@techie.com> wrote:
>
> Basically the resampling or conversion of a small image to its
> equivalent larger image with as little loss in quality as possible.
>
> Genuine Fractals can for example convert a 32x32 ICO into a 640x480
> image with very little loss in quality. Add a touch up here and there
> and you have a near perfect reproduction of that itty-bitty icon.
> You can see an example comparing Genuine Fractals to a bicubic
> smoother at: http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=2

Also check out SAR from general-cathexis.com, which produces
(for some images) better upsampling results than Genuine Fractals.
It too can be run independently, not just as a plug-in.

[-Lost]

Response from Bill Tuthill <ccre...@yahoo.com>:

Awesome, thanks for the link! This seems to do the trick, but boy is
it involving. It seems I am going to have to acquaint myself with
several new algorithms and implementations just to get started
(because my first attempt looked HORRID).

Thanks again!

[Martin Schöön]

"-Lost" <maventhee...@techie.com> writes:

> Response from Bill Tuthill <ccre...@yahoo.com>:
>
>> Lost <maventhee...@techie.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Basically the resampling or conversion of a small image to its
>>> equivalent larger image with as little loss in quality as
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> Genuine Fractals can for example convert a 32x32 ICO into a
>>> 640x480 image with very little loss in quality. Add a touch up
>>> here and there and you have a near perfect reproduction of that
>>> itty-bitty icon.

A philosophical comment:
Am I the only one around here that find the above rather strange?
A 32x32 image doesn't have much 'quality' and when its is blown up
to a bigger format that becomes painfully obvious but that is not
"loss of quality" IMHO.

--
Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack
show their worth by hitting back."
Piet Hein

[Bill Tuthill]

Martin Schöön <martin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Genuine Fractals can for example convert a 32x32 ICO into a
>>>> 640x480 image with very little loss in quality.
>

> A philosophical comment:
> Am I the only one around here that find the above rather strange?
> A 32x32 image doesn't have much 'quality' and when its is blown up
> to a bigger format that becomes painfully obvious but that is not
> "loss of quality" IMHO.

Yes, but note the words "for example." Hopefully, this was just
a theoretical example.

Genuine Fractals seems good for images with a lot of detail, but not
as good as alternatives for images with large continuous-tone areas.
I like results from Qimage and the newer methods in SAR.

[-Lost]

Response from Bill Tuthill <ccre...@yahoo.com>:

> Martin Schöön <martin...@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh yeah, definitely just an example and one just flung from the top
of my head. I remember a Genuine Fractals developer mentioning
something about a small "icon sized" graphic being resized to 640x480
with perfect resampling or upsampling.

Since I could not remember specifically what was said about
resolution or find the thread, I just ran with a large icon size I
could think of.