genuine fractals

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by UC, Dec 23, 2009.

  1. UC

    UC Guest

    anyone here own it?

    I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    larger size?

    Thanks
     
    UC, Dec 23, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "UC" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > anyone here own it?
    >
    > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > larger size?
    >
    > Thanks


    Ah, that brings back memories - I used to enjoy playing with it.
    If you had the original program and knew the parameters you
    had fed into it, it may be possible to generate a new similar image
    with a higher resolution - but, sorry, I can't help...
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Dec 23, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. UC

    NameHere Guest

    On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:32:21 -0800 (PST), UC <>
    wrote:

    >anyone here own it?
    >
    >I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    >obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    >larger size?
    >
    >Thanks


    I've used Genuine Fractals a few times, but the paint-by-numbers appearance
    of the detail enlargement isn't to my liking. It's also very costly for
    what it claims to do. As well being rather convoluted in functionality, not
    easy for a novice to use.

    You might want to search out any utilities that use the S-Spline upsampling
    technique. One of my favorites being BenVista PhotoZoom Pro.

    While not having S-Spline methods, Qimage (for printing) and Cleanerzoomer
    are both adequate upsampling utilities too. As are some editors that
    include more than the common bicubic resampling methods. Some subjects work
    better with certain resampling algorithms than others (Bell, Pyramid,
    Triangle, Lanczos, etc.). There's no real cut & dried answer in this
    regard. But S-Spline capable utilities are usually the safest bet for
    upsampling.

    You might like to also apply a Fourier Transform utility after upsampling,
    commonly marketed as focus-sharpening utilities. One of my favorites is
    marketed under the name of Focus Magic. When not applied too strongly it
    can tighten up some of those soft edges created when upsampling an image
    greatly. Creating some false detail where there was none before. Focus
    Magic, when used together with S-Spline upsampling first, can create some
    quite believable detail. Sometimes it's best to apply a Fourier Transform
    in several smaller and weaker stages, rather than one large strong step in
    focus adjustment. Applied to strongly and you'll get annoying, what they
    call, "ringing artifacts". You'll learn to recognize what this is the first
    time you play with a Fourier Transform tool. It's easy to get those ugly
    artifacts if you aren't careful.

    Any tool is only as good as the talent of the person manipulating that
    tool. This applies to all editing software (noise removers, resampling
    tools, basic editing, etc.) as well as the cameras in hand.
     
    NameHere, Dec 23, 2009
    #3
  4. UC

    Bob Williams Guest

    UC wrote:
    > anyone here own it?
    >
    > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > larger size?
    >
    > Thanks



    How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Dec 24, 2009
    #4
  5. UC

    Martin Brown Guest

    UC wrote:
    > anyone here own it?
    >
    > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > larger size?


    GF is mostly marketting hype. You cannot magically blow up tiny bits of
    image and obtain more detail from nowhere in the style of Bladerunner.

    In some limited instances where natural textures like trees or rocky
    crags that are roughly self similar fractals GF can invent plausible
    looking "new" but fake detail. These conditions are seldom met in reality.

    Your best bet is to upscale the image by factors of 2 with the best
    interpolation function your image processing package provides (some
    would argue for multiple upscalings of 1.1x) and then apply unsharp
    masking to taste on the final image to bring the edges back to
    sharpness. It might be good enough if you are *very* lucky.

    You are unlikely to be satisfied with the results however it is done.

    Regards,
    Martin Brown
     
    Martin Brown, Dec 24, 2009
    #5
  6. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    > > anyone here own it?

    >
    > > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > > larger size?

    >
    > > Thanks

    >
    > How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    > How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    > Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    > Bob Williams


    It's 600 x 450 pixels, 72 pixels/inch resolution. I have Photoshop 5.0
    LE, and have enlarged the image using that program, judiciously
    applying sharpening etc. It still looks like crap. I need to use it in
    a calendar at about 30-40% bigger than its actual size. I'm sure you
    see the problem. I need to use it at 9 x 5.23 when it should be used
    at about 6 x 3.5.
     
    UC, Dec 24, 2009
    #6
  7. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    > > anyone here own it?

    >
    > > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > > larger size?

    >
    > > Thanks

    >
    > How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    > How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    > Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    > Bob Williams


    Here it is:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/45947372@N08/4210457549/
     
    UC, Dec 24, 2009
    #7
  8. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    > > anyone here own it?

    >
    > > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > > larger size?

    >
    > > Thanks

    >
    > How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    > How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    > Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    > Bob Williams


    I can e-mail it to anyone who can help.

    My e-mail is:

    petraioprime
    @
    yahoo
    dot
    com
     
    UC, Dec 24, 2009
    #8
  9. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 24, 10:07 am, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim>
    wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    > > On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    > >> UC wrote:
    > >>> anyone here own it?
    > >>> I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > >>> obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > >>> larger size?
    > >>> Thanks
    > >> How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    > >> How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    > >> Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    > >> Bob Williams

    >
    > > Here it is:

    >
    > >http://www.flickr.com/photos/45947372@N08/4210457549/

    >
    > You're not going to sell many Calendars!
    >
    > BugBear


    LOL. It's a company calendar showing bridges we have designed. This
    photo was taken by the county engineer with a primitive digital camera.
     
    UC, Dec 24, 2009
    #9
  10. UC

    J. Clarke Guest

    John McWilliams wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    >> On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    >>> UC wrote:
    >>>> anyone here own it?
    >>>> I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It
    >>>> has obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this
    >>>> into a larger size?
    >>>> Thanks
    >>> How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    >>> How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    >>> Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    >>> Bob Williams

    >>
    >> It's 600 x 450 pixels, 72 pixels/inch resolution. I have Photoshop
    >> 5.0 LE, and have enlarged the image using that program, judiciously
    >> applying sharpening etc. It still looks like crap. I need to use it
    >> in a calendar at about 30-40% bigger than its actual size. I'm sure
    >> you see the problem. I need to use it at 9 x 5.23 when it should be
    >> used at about 6 x 3.5.

    >
    > A 6" x 3.5" print from the above pixels will itself look like crap,
    > never mind at a larger size. You really need to retake or substitute
    > something else.


    Or hire an illustrator to do a photorealistic rendering based on the photo.
    This will probably cost more than just reshooting if the subject is still
    accessible.
     
    J. Clarke, Dec 24, 2009
    #10
  11. "David Ruether" <> wrote in message
    news:hgu0kc$dru$...
    > "UC" <> wrote in message
    > news:...


    >> anyone here own it?
    >>
    >> I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    >> obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    >> larger size?
    >>
    >> Thanks


    > Ah, that brings back memories - I used to enjoy playing with it.
    > If you had the original program and knew the parameters you
    > had fed into it, it may be possible to generate a new similar image
    > with a higher resolution - but, sorry, I can't help...
    > --DR


    Ah, sorry, I was thinking of a different program, although I
    do own Genuine Fractals also (wanna buy it? ;-). I've been
    able to get decent horizontals for DVD covers from SD
    video frames, but for anything larger than about 1.5x (with
    compatible image material), the results are not great - and
    your photo does not look like it would work well trying
    to do anything with this program... You may be able to get
    around this by having a graphic artist turn the image into an
    illustration based on the photo (which would also likely
    result in a "prettier" image for the calendar...).
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Dec 24, 2009
    #11
  12. UC

    Ray Fischer Guest

    J. Clarke <> wrote:
    >John McWilliams wrote:
    >> UC wrote:


    >>> It's 600 x 450 pixels, 72 pixels/inch resolution. I have Photoshop
    >>> 5.0 LE, and have enlarged the image using that program, judiciously
    >>> applying sharpening etc. It still looks like crap. I need to use it
    >>> in a calendar at about 30-40% bigger than its actual size. I'm sure
    >>> you see the problem. I need to use it at 9 x 5.23 when it should be
    >>> used at about 6 x 3.5.

    >>
    >> A 6" x 3.5" print from the above pixels will itself look like crap,
    >> never mind at a larger size. You really need to retake or substitute
    >> something else.

    >
    >Or hire an illustrator to do a photorealistic rendering based on the photo.
    >This will probably cost more than just reshooting if the subject is still
    >accessible.


    That's probably the best idea yet. A decent arist with the photo and
    Adobe Illustrator could produce something that would look far better
    than the photo magnified far more than is sensible.

    --
    Ray Fischer
     
    Ray Fischer, Dec 24, 2009
    #12
  13. UC

    ray Guest

    On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:32:21 -0800, UC wrote:

    > anyone here own it?
    >
    > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > larger size?
    >
    > Thanks


    Have you tried using a photo editor to do an 'artistic effect' - like
    'clothify' or 'impressionist' or 'cartoon' - lots of possibilities
    several of which will likely end up looking a lot better than what you're
    trying to accomplish.
     
    ray, Dec 24, 2009
    #13
  14. UC

    NameHere Guest

    On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 06:47:45 -0800 (PST), UC <>
    wrote:

    >On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    >> UC wrote:
    >> > anyone here own it?

    >>
    >> > I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    >> > obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    >> > larger size?

    >>
    >> > Thanks

    >>
    >> How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    >> How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    >> Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    >> Bob Williams

    >
    >Here it is:
    >
    >http://www.flickr.com/photos/45947372@N08/4210457549/


    Here's using that even smaller 500x375 version posted at flickr. Better
    results could be obtained with the slightly larger original.

    Yours

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4055/4210457549_b4014207ec.jpg

    Upsampled to 1800x1350 for 300dpi printing. A 360% enlargement.

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2679/4211407297_b383284354_b.jpg

    (flickr again downsizing it to 1024x768)

    However, for a calendar you could easily get away with 150dpi, upsampling
    to only 900x675 pixel dimensions.

    Upsample to 6"x4.5" at 300 dpi using B-Spline algorithm. Not S-Spline this
    time, B-Spline was better for this type of subject, when knowing I was
    going to again later use a Fourier Transform tool on it. No unsharp-mask
    sharpening. Then applying the Fourier Transform in 3 steps.

    4 pixel dia. at 75%
    2 pixel dia. at 75%
    2 pixel dia. at 75%

    (Those are not cut 'n dried rules for transform steps, it's just what
    seemed to work okay with so little time and effort devoted to this)

    Compare the images side-by-side of the workers at the edge of the bridge to
    see what kind of plausible results can be munged out of so few pixels.

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2696/4212201408_0430234f5e_o.jpg

    Half-tone printing in most magazines and calendars, at that image size, has
    far less detail than this does. Besides, you say it's for a company
    calendar. Most of those will be used for dart-board practice by any
    employees or thrown in the trash or used to light their fireplaces when
    they get it home. Make sure you credit the photo with original pixel
    dimensions to get yourself off-the-hook, should anyone whine about the
    image quality.

    I wouldn't suggest using this one I that uploaded, as it was done with your
    even-lower-resolution image from flickr and I used a high JPG compression
    on it so as to not waste bandwidth. Not to mention that flickr downsized it
    and JPG compressed again.

    Use the above method and try it yourself with your own tools. I have no
    intentions of offering further help than this. Unless you give me ten times
    that portion of your hourly paycheck or salary for the time you would have,
    and already have, spent doing this yourself.
     
    NameHere, Dec 25, 2009
    #14
  15. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 24, 11:16 am, John McWilliams <> wrote:
    > UC wrote:
    > > On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:
    > >> UC wrote:
    > >>> anyone here own it?
    > >>> I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > >>> obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > >>> larger size?
    > >>> Thanks
    > >> How big is your original? (X pixels x Y pixels)
    > >> How big do you want the Calendar image to be? (X inches x Y inches)
    > >> Do you have Photoshop? Any other image editor?
    > >> Bob Williams

    >
    > > It's 600 x 450 pixels, 72 pixels/inch resolution. I have Photoshop 5.0
    > > LE, and have enlarged the image using that program, judiciously
    > > applying sharpening etc. It still looks like crap. I need to use it in
    > > a calendar at about 30-40% bigger than its actual size. I'm sure you
    > > see the problem. I need to use it at 9 x 5.23 when it should be used
    > > at about 6 x 3.5.

    >
    > A 6" x 3.5" print from the above pixels will itself look like crap,
    > never mind at a larger size. You really need to retake or substitute
    > something else.
    >
    > --
    > john mcwilliams


    Impossible. Was taken by county engineer during construction of a
    bridge several years ago.
     
    UC, Dec 28, 2009
    #15
  16. UC wrote:
    > On Dec 24, 11:16 am, John McWilliams <> wrote:
    >> UC wrote:
    >>> On Dec 24, 3:09 am, Bob Williams <> wrote:


    >>> It's 600 x 450 pixels, 72 pixels/inch resolution. I have Photoshop 5.0
    >>> LE, and have enlarged the image using that program, judiciously
    >>> applying sharpening etc. It still looks like crap. I need to use it in
    >>> a calendar at about 30-40% bigger than its actual size. I'm sure you
    >>> see the problem. I need to use it at 9 x 5.23 when it should be used
    >>> at about 6 x 3.5.

    >> A 6" x 3.5" print from the above pixels will itself look like crap,
    >> never mind at a larger size. You really need to retake or substitute
    >> something else.


    > Impossible. Was taken by county engineer during construction of a
    > bridge several years ago.


    I understand that now. So, either substitute something else, or your
    next best bet was suggested by John Clark.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 31, 2009
    #16
  17. UC

    me Guest

    On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:32:21 -0800 (PST), UC
    <> wrote:

    >anyone here own it?
    >
    >I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    >obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    >larger size?


    In stead of GF you might give the demo version of Qimage a try. It
    contains some of the best upsampling algorithms. But given the size of
    the original you stated elsewhere, it sounds like you are asking for a
    miracle.
     
    me, Dec 31, 2009
    #17
  18. UC

    UC Guest

    On Dec 31, 1:31 pm, me <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:32:21 -0800 (PST), UC
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >anyone here own it?

    >
    > >I have a smallish file that I have to use large in a calendar. It has
    > >obvious pixellation. Is anyone willing to help me process this into a
    > >larger size?

    >
    > In stead of GF you might give the demo version of Qimage a try. It
    > contains some of the best upsampling algorithms. But given the size of
    > the original you stated elsewhere, it sounds like you are asking for a
    > miracle.


    Yeah, I need a miracle. LOL
     
    UC, Dec 31, 2009
    #18
    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. speedburn

    genuine fractals ser no req'd thanks

    speedburn, Jul 23, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    478
    Webkatz
    Jul 25, 2003
  2. Click

    Genuine Fractals questions

    Click, Jul 27, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    478
    Bill Hilton
    Jul 27, 2003
  3. Re: Genuine fractals trial

    , Jul 31, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    572
    Bart van der Wolf
    Aug 2, 2003
  4. Lisa Horton

    16x20 prints from 10D, Genuine Fractals?

    Lisa Horton, Sep 3, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    985
    Bill Hilton
    Sep 4, 2003
  5. Hans-Georg Michna

    Upscaling Programs - Qimage, Genuine Fractals, pxl SmartScale

    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    12,180
    Hans-Georg Michna
    Oct 26, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page