[def4d]

'Thank You' to ivox3 for a great tutorial

[numerobis]

very cool!
here is the result using photozoom and photoshop (16bit image upsized in 10% steps)

photozoom 4892pix


photoshop - image converted to 16bit, upsized in 10% steps to 4892pix

[simmsimaging]

That is clever - nice one.

That said, I also use Photozoom Pro and can highly recommend that as well.


b

[ivox3]

Thanks all ... and special thanks to numerobis for those comparisons. Cool...

numerobis, .. question: Which image did you use as the original ?

Well .. as far as the comparisons to Photozoom ... I'm confidant that the results obtained from either are mutual in quality. So the real difference comes down to ease of application and cost.

If you do a lot of scaling ... PZ is definitely the investment. And having only the occasional use, .. well, ..look no further than MW.

I'm curious about anyone who's practiced rendering out lower resolution on purpose and then doing a quick upsize to higher resolution just to save time ? I'm just wondering how often that kind of thing is done ... it does represent kind of a cheat solution for long term renders -- I'm thinking.

[numerobis]

i've used the one you posted first with 298 x 226 px

[ivox3]

Oh ok ... nicely done.

I hate to say it .. but that PS version is looking good !

Pretty amazing when you think about it and then physically see it ... with any method.

[kami]

I'm just wondering how often that kind of thing is done ... it does represent kind of a cheat solution for long term renders -- I'm thinking.

I sometimes do this, if a customer insists on 300dpi renderings for a large scale poster print
because I just don't understand what that extra bit of dpi should be good for ... nobody is going to search with a magnifier for pixels

[def4d]

i often enlarge for printing, but what is interesting here is that we can improve very low rez textures with your technique!

[samsam]

ivox3 - what a great idea!

Many thanks,

samsam

[wimver]

Herve,

since no one seems to have noticed, I will ask: what did you use to upscale the image? or do you own the original?

btw, I use genuine fractals since it was born, tested all the others regularly, but GF still has best performance for me.

Wim

[Hervé]

this is an original one.. rendered at this size... to compare...

[Micha]

The Maxwell image is a little bit more blur than the PS upscale. Blur the PS image and it will looks like the Maxwell rendering.

The free image viewer IrfanView allow to use an enhanced upscale technology based on the " Lanczos" method:

http://www.irfanview.de/

[ivox3]

Micha ... It is due to the use of jpeg compression (my version). The technique used with a lossless codec will match up to any of the others IMO. But that's not important ... what is important is that when printed, ..to the naked eye, .....differences will be essentially not discernible.

The real point is this: Which one is easiest? ...economical ? Because nobody views images at 1500%. So these are just avenues of choice.

[Hervé]

... So these are just avenues of choice.

he he I like that..

[sandykoufax]

http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=7

similar to alienskin's one.