Posted by David Schoen on February 20, 2010 at 12:57 PM
Can someone enlighten me on the use of programs like genuine fractiles vs PS4 for enlargement. I shoot D700 and may print 80% crops at 13 X 19 on my Epson R2400 on either Epson Premium Presentation Matte or Epson Exhibition Fiber with appropriate ICC profiles. Is there a rule of thumb or algorithm where I would see improved detail over PS4 by using one of these programs and is it really necessary to have the latest version?
Posted by David Bostedo on February 20, 2010 at 1:12 PM
Here's a long look at the differences in three parts by Ctein on The Online Photographer David :
I think the short answer is that in some cases Genuine Fractals works better and in a lot of other cases not. Personally, I don't think it's worth the money, but YMMV.
Posted by Dan Borzynski on February 20, 2010 at 4:18 PM
(David, I am going to answer this assuming that you are asking a general question about most of the images you take and print.)
Back in the early days of digital, maybe 2002-2003, Photoshop's interpolation algorithms weren't all that great. Not bad, but Genuine Fractals was better. At the time, we also didn't have 10 mp cameras as starter bodies either.
In the time since, Adobe has greatly improved the quality of their algorithms and we now have a lot more megapixels as a starting point. For most situations, Adobe's algorithms produce end prints of equal quality. For most situations and most photographers, I don't see the need to spend the money on Genuine Fractals.
I agree with the other David that Genuine Fractals isn't worth the money. I also agree with Dan that the algorithms in PS are excellent. In any event, careful noise reduction and sharpening will be very important.
--P
Posted by David Schoen on February 21, 2010 at 2:19 PM
Thank you all. I won a licensed copy of On One Plug-In Suite several years ago for CS2/XP and it includes Genuine Fractiles but I have not installed it. I am assuming it will run but it only supports 8-bit images and 32 bit OS. The Ctein article is very informative..
David
Posted by Dan Borzynski on February 21, 2010 at 2:44 PM
8 bit support really shouldn't be an issue as resizing and sharpening are the last two steps you should be doing before printing. Just make sure you have saved the original as a masterfile in case you ever have to go back and reprint at a different size.
Posted by Nancy Elwood on February 24, 2010 at 6:14 PM
The one program I have found to really help the results of outputing to print is Niksoftware's Nik sharpener. I up size in CS3 and then use Nik sharpener with my Epson R1900 and love the results.
Posted by David Schoen on February 24, 2010 at 9:27 PM
I also use Nik products and they work very well for many of my images.
Discussion
7 repliesIt's Bigger But Is It Better
It's Bigger But Is It Better II
It's Bigger But Is It Better III
I think the short answer is that in some cases Genuine Fractals works better and in a lot of other cases not. Personally, I don't think it's worth the money, but YMMV.
Back in the early days of digital, maybe 2002-2003, Photoshop's interpolation algorithms weren't all that great. Not bad, but Genuine Fractals was better. At the time, we also didn't have 10 mp cameras as starter bodies either.
In the time since, Adobe has greatly improved the quality of their algorithms and we now have a lot more megapixels as a starting point. For most situations, Adobe's algorithms produce end prints of equal quality. For most situations and most photographers, I don't see the need to spend the money on Genuine Fractals.
I agree with the other David that Genuine Fractals isn't worth the money. I also agree with Dan that the algorithms in PS are excellent. In any event, careful noise reduction and sharpening will be very important.
--P
David