Enlarge digital pics?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David, Oct 19, 2005.

  1. David

    David Guest

    Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    losing clarity?

    TIA
     
    David, Oct 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David

    Lorem Ipsum Guest

    "David" <> wrote in message
    news:g_x5f.1741$...
    > Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    > losing clarity?


    No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your expectations and use
    almost anything to upsample to your hearts desire.
     
    Lorem Ipsum, Oct 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Charles Schuler, Oct 19, 2005
    #3
  4. "Lorem Ipsum" <> writes:

    > "David" <> wrote in message
    > news:g_x5f.1741$...
    >> Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    >> losing clarity?

    >
    > No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your expectations and use
    > almost anything to upsample to your hearts desire.


    You can also use various complicated algorithms to actually invent
    details. Here's an example:
    http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration1/

    --
    Måns Rullgård
     
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=, Oct 19, 2005
    #4
  5. On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:26:52 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "David"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    >losing clarity?


    You can't make something out of nothing. However for the PC Irfanview has
    may interpolation routines, with the Lanczos being one of the better ones.,
    and it's free. http://www.irfanview.com
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), Oct 19, 2005
    #5
  6. David

    Jasen Guest

    "Måns Rullgård" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Lorem Ipsum" <> writes:
    >
    > > "David" <> wrote in message
    > > news:g_x5f.1741$...
    > >> Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    > >> losing clarity?

    > >
    > > No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your expectations and use
    > > almost anything to upsample to your hearts desire.

    >
    > You can also use various complicated algorithms to actually invent
    > details. Here's an example:
    > http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration1/
    >
    > --
    > Måns Rullgård
    >


    So which software incorporates this Richardson-Lucy algorithm?
     
    Jasen, Oct 19, 2005
    #6
  7. "Jasen" <> writes:

    > "Måns Rullgård" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> "Lorem Ipsum" <> writes:
    >>
    >> > "David" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:g_x5f.1741$...
    >> >> Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    >> >> losing clarity?
    >> >
    >> > No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your expectations and use
    >> > almost anything to upsample to your hearts desire.

    >>
    >> You can also use various complicated algorithms to actually invent
    >> details. Here's an example:
    >> http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration1/

    >
    > So which software incorporates this Richardson-Lucy algorithm?


    At least the one linked at the bottom of the page:
    http://www.mlunsold.com/

    Another interesting algorithm is this one:
    http://www-sop.inria.fr/odyssee/research/tschumperle-deriche:02d/appliu/

    --
    Måns Rullgård
     
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=, Oct 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Today Lorem Ipsum spoke these views with conviction for
    everyone's edification:

    >> Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital
    >> pics without losing clarity?

    >
    > No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your
    > expectations and use almost anything to upsample to your
    > hearts desire.


    This is obviously correct as stated. However many utilities
    exist to do a better job of "inventing" the pixels, such as
    Genuine Fractals, PhotoZoo, Qimage, and others, as well as an
    algorithm developed by Steven A. Ruzinsky.

    I haven't used these personally, but I was contacted by a person
    who does scan restorations and digital enlargements as a hobby,
    who pointed my in the above directions. What he did with a 600 x
    400 image of my father on Iwo Jima was a sight to behold at
    bigger than 1280 x 960, a 4X increase in the number of pixels.

    --
    ATM, aka Jerry
     
    All Things Mopar, Oct 20, 2005
    #8
  9. David

    Celcius Guest

    "David" <> wrote in message
    news:g_x5f.1741$...
    >
    >
    > Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    > losing clarity?
    >
    > TIA
    >
    >

    David,
    It all depends how large you want your photo to be and how good it was in
    the first place.
    In "The Photoshop Book for digital photgraphers", Scott Kelby on page 68
    explains how to turn small photos into poster size prints.
    Briefly, it consists into going to "Image size", changing "Document size" to
    "percent" and checking "Resample image". You make the percentage which shows
    at this point 100%, 110% and click "OK". You will see the image growing a
    wee bit. You open again "Image size", change the 100% to 110%, ensure that
    ""Resample image" is ticked off and click "OK". You do this for 10 or
    whatever the numeber of times it takes. The trick here is to create your own
    custom actions with "Actions" and recording it. Then you hit the action
    "arrow" the number of times it takes. Surprisinngly, it seems that growing
    by 10% will not hurt the photo too much.
    For all it's worth,
    Marcel
     
    Celcius, Oct 20, 2005
    #9
  10. "Jasen" <> wrote in message
    news:34A5f.348$...
    >
    > "Måns Rullgård" <> wrote in message
    > news:...

    SNIP
    >> Here's an example:
    >> http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration1/

    [...]
    > So which software incorporates this Richardson-Lucy algorithm?


    The software used in the above link, ImagesPlus
    (http://www.mlunsold.com/) does. Iris
    (http://www.astrosurf.org/buil/us/iris/iris.htm) also does (although
    in a bit of a convoluted way), and MathLab
    (http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/toolbox/images/deblurr7.html)
    does, to name a few.

    This is my own crop of a RL sample:
    <http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/main/downloads/Batavia_Crop.jpg>

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Oct 20, 2005
    #10
  11. David

    Alan Meyer Guest

    All Things Mopar wrote:

    > ... I was contacted by a person
    > who does scan restorations and digital enlargements as a hobby,
    > who pointed my in the above directions. What he did with a 600 x
    > 400 image of my father on Iwo Jima was a sight to behold at
    > bigger than 1280 x 960, a 4X increase in the number of pixels.


    Jerry,

    I'd love to see those two images if you feel like posting
    them somewhere on the net (or even emailing them to me.)

    Thanks.

    Alan
     
    Alan Meyer, Oct 21, 2005
    #11
  12. David

    Rich Guest

    On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:26:52 GMT, "David" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital pics without
    >losing clarity?
    >
    >TIA
    >


    No.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Oct 21, 2005
    #12
  13. David

    Rich Guest

    On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 21:26:51 -0500, All Things Mopar <>
    wrote:

    >Today Lorem Ipsum spoke these views with conviction for
    >everyone's edification:
    >
    >>> Is there a programme/software available to enlarge digital
    >>> pics without losing clarity?

    >>
    >> No. You can't invent detail. But you can lower your
    >> expectations and use almost anything to upsample to your
    >> hearts desire.

    >
    >This is obviously correct as stated. However many utilities
    >exist to do a better job of "inventing" the pixels, such as
    >Genuine Fractals, PhotoZoo, Qimage, and others, as well as an
    >algorithm developed by Steven A. Ruzinsky.
    >
    >I haven't used these personally, but I was contacted by a person
    >who does scan restorations and digital enlargements as a hobby,
    >who pointed my in the above directions. What he did with a 600 x
    >400 image of my father on Iwo Jima was a sight to behold at
    >bigger than 1280 x 960, a 4X increase in the number of pixels.


    Some programs do a credible job, but the laws of physics say you
    can't create someting from nothing. They only "fill in the gaps"
    with "like" pixels. If the picture contains lots of high frequency
    detail, forget it.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Oct 21, 2005
    #13
  14. Today Alan Meyer spoke these views with conviction for
    everyone's edification:

    >> ... I was contacted by a person
    >> who does scan restorations and digital enlargements as a
    >> hobby, who pointed my in the above directions. What he did
    >> with a 600 x 400 image of my father on Iwo Jima was a
    >> sight to behold at bigger than 1280 x 960, a 4X increase
    >> in the number of pixels.

    >
    > Jerry,
    >
    > I'd love to see those two images if you feel like posting
    > them somewhere on the net (or even emailing them to me.)


    Dang! Knew somebody'd ask me to prove this! <grin>

    Alan, is that your correct E-mail in your header? If yes, I'll
    E-mail the original and the couple of tweaked big versions.

    The original image was scanned by someone from the original
    Joe Rosenthal picture taken of 20 Marines clustered around the
    flag atop Mt. Suribachi. My father is one, although he wasn't
    one of the original 6 flag raisers. He was in the company that
    assaulted the hill, and is also pictured in about 10 seconds
    worth of color movie footage shot by Marine Combat
    Photographer Bill Genaust. Genaust, sadly, was KIA later in
    the battle.

    If anyone reading this reply might also be interested in these
    pictures for either WWII historical reasons or to see the very
    great degree of enlargement, I could post to either one of the
    following, instead of mailing only to Alan, just name your
    poison:

    alt.binaries.photos
    alt.binaries.amp
    alt.binaries.pictures.military

    The original scan is only 618 x 489 but the enlargements are
    1233 x 960 and 2472 x 1925. There's more noise in the bigger
    pictures that got put there by the guy who created them
    because he likes the look of old-fashioned film grain in his
    digital images. Still, the quality is amazing, at least to me.
    I wish I could explain the technique used and the software
    package but these details are buried in the middle of a really
    long E-mail and I never understood it last year.

    --
    ATM, aka Jerry
     
    All Things Mopar, Oct 21, 2005
    #14
  15. Today Rich spoke these views with conviction for everyone's
    edification:

    >>This is obviously correct as stated. However many utilities
    >>exist to do a better job of "inventing" the pixels, such as
    >>Genuine Fractals, PhotoZoo, Qimage, and others, as well as
    >>an algorithm developed by Steven A. Ruzinsky.
    >>
    >>I haven't used these personally, but I was contacted by a
    >>person who does scan restorations and digital enlargements
    >>as a hobby, who pointed my in the above directions. What
    >>he did with a 600 x 400 image of my father on Iwo Jima was
    >>a sight to behold at bigger than 1280 x 960, a 4X increase
    >>in the number of pixels.

    >
    > Some programs do a credible job, but the laws of physics
    > say you can't create someting from nothing. They only
    > "fill in the gaps" with "like" pixels. If the picture
    > contains lots of high frequency detail, forget it.


    Rich, my only very limited knowledge of the programs I listed
    suggest to me that a form of "artificial intelligence" is used
    to do a better job of deciding what source pixels to use for the
    "invented" pixels and which ones can be discarded, both of which
    are used to optimize results for best sharpness, detail, dynamic
    range, noise, etc., all under user control. That's not a
    technically accurate observation, I know, but the results cannot
    be explained by conventional wisdom in PSP 9 or PS CS that I've
    ever seen, as you correctly commented on.

    --
    ATM, aka Jerry
     
    All Things Mopar, Oct 21, 2005
    #15
  16. David

    Mike Warren Guest

    All Things Mopar wrote:
    > If anyone reading this reply might also be interested in these
    > pictures for either WWII historical reasons or to see the very
    > great degree of enlargement, I could post to either one of the
    > following, instead of mailing only to Alan, just name your
    > poison:


    I'm interested in looking as well. If you are able to email them
    to me I could put them on my web space for others to look at.
    (if you're ok with that)

    miwa at cairnscarsound
    dot com
    dot au

    --
    Mike Warren
    My web gallery: http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/mike
     
    Mike Warren, Oct 21, 2005
    #16
  17. Today Mike Warren spoke these views with conviction for
    everyone's edification:

    > All Things Mopar wrote:
    >> If anyone reading this reply might also be interested in
    >> these pictures for either WWII historical reasons or to
    >> see the very great degree of enlargement, I could post to
    >> either one of the following, instead of mailing only to
    >> Alan, just name your poison:

    >
    > I'm interested in looking as well. If you are able to email
    > them to me I could put them on my web space for others to
    > look at. (if you're ok with that)
    >

    That's two interested people. I think it'd be better if we agree
    on a NG or two for me to post these to so everyone interested
    can see them.

    I do not own the copyright to the original photo (obviously),
    nor does anyone own a copyright on the enlargements, which would
    be invalid by definition. So, Mike, I imagine you'd be Okey,
    Dokey putting them on your web site.

    Just looking for direction from the group...

    --
    ATM, aka Jerry
     
    All Things Mopar, Oct 21, 2005
    #17
  18. David

    Alan Meyer Guest

    All Things Mopar wrote:
    > ...
    > Alan, is that your correct E-mail in your header? If yes, I'll
    > E-mail the original and the couple of tweaked big versions.


    Yep, that's the real me.

    I have other email addresses but I use Yahoo for anything I
    post on the net because their spam filters are so good.

    > The original image was scanned by someone from the original
    > Joe Rosenthal picture taken of 20 Marines clustered around the
    > flag atop Mt. Suribachi. My father is one, although he wasn't
    > one of the original 6 flag raisers. He was in the company that
    > assaulted the hill, and is also pictured in about 10 seconds
    > worth of color movie footage shot by Marine Combat
    > Photographer Bill Genaust. Genaust, sadly, was KIA later in
    > the battle.
    >
    > If anyone reading this reply might also be interested in these
    > pictures for either WWII historical reasons or to see the very
    > great degree of enlargement.


    I am interested for historical as well as photographic reasons.

    We all owe your father and his buddies a serious debt of
    gratitude.

    Alan
     
    Alan Meyer, Oct 21, 2005
    #18
  19. David

    Mike Warren Guest

    All Things Mopar wrote:
    > I do not own the copyright to the original photo (obviously),
    > nor does anyone own a copyright on the enlargements, which would
    > be invalid by definition. So, Mike, I imagine you'd be Okey,
    > Dokey putting them on your web site.


    I would only link to them from this NG and don't mind putting
    them up until you want me to remove them.

    --
    Mike Warren
    My web gallery: http://web.aanet.com.au/miwa/mike
     
    Mike Warren, Oct 21, 2005
    #19
  20. Hi David,

    Enlarging without loss in clarity is impossible. You may get some good
    results by enlarging 1% at a time though. That is, enlarge to 101% each
    time until you get the results you want.

    **************************************************************
    Sincerely,
    Gary Hendricks, Basic-Digital-Photography.com
    The best digital photography tutorials and how-to guides:
    http://www.basic-digital-photography.com
    **************************************************************
     
    Gary Hendricks, Oct 21, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Hellenic Mensa
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    474
    John McWilliams
    Aug 30, 2004
  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?mark=5Fdigital=A9?=

    You can enlarge a tire but you can't enlarge a photo

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?mark=5Fdigital=A9?=, Mar 3, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    729
    Colin D
    Mar 8, 2006
  3. Progressiveabsolution
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    403
    Progressiveabsolution
    Sep 4, 2006
  4. thankyou

    Enlarge Digital Photos

    thankyou, Jun 14, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    640
    thankyou
    Jun 16, 2009
  5. Don Tuttle

    Viewer to enlarge pics taken in the field on the spot?

    Don Tuttle, Sep 27, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    383
    Marty Freeman
    Oct 1, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page