Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 23, 2012, 08:43

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print

Topic: Question on upsizing in Photoshop  

(Read 2729 times)
ovbg

New Member


« on: March 31, 2007, 09:03 »

Hello, I have PS CS1, and was wondering about the best upsizing method for Alamy. Would I be correct in using the standard menu option: "Image/Image Size", constrain proportons and Bicubic, and set the size to say 110%?

Thnaks.


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
rjmiz


Dreamstime Gauge
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2007, 10:02 »

Yes, 10% at a time, and make sure you use "Bicubic  Smoother" in the drop down menus at the bottom.
I recommend Genuine Fractals, but making an action to increase the size 10% at a time, using "Bicubic  Smoother"
might be just the ticket as long as you don't upsize it too much ...maybe 2 times or 3.


Ignore | Logged


Greg Boiarsky


« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2007, 10:09 »

Actually, you don't need to resize in steps.  Since resizing involves interpolation, and interpolation involves error, you're compounding the interpolation error by adding in multiple steps.  That is, rather than adding a lot of error in once, you're adding a bit of error at each step, which then becomes compounded with the error introduced in the next step.  In the end, you find you've increased the error more by using a stepped algorhythm.  It's not typically a big difference, but in significant uprezzing, it might be visible.

Nonetheless, there likely isn't much of a difference between the two techniques in most situations.  So, doing the uprez in one step will save time.

I use Qimage for increasing file size.  It works very well, but others like Bob use Genuine Fractals to great advantage.

One last thing--it's vital that you not uprez a sharpened image.  It will look absolutely terrible.

Just my 2 cents worth--for what it's worth.

Yes, 10% at a time, and make sure you use "Bicubic  Smoother" in the drop down menus at the bottom.
I recommend Genuine Fractals, but making an action to increase the size 10% at a time, using "Bicubic  Smoother"
might be just the ticket as long as you don't upsize it too much ...maybe 2 times or 3.

« Last Edit: March 31, 2007, 10:13 by Professorgb »
Logged


Greg Boiarsky


« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2007, 10:12 »

oops--hit the wrong stupid button.

Logged


madelaide
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2007, 14:24 »

On my few experiences with 50-100% upsizing, I asked a friend who has Genuine Fractals to use it so I could compared with other cheaper software. I was highly disappointed with it.  Maybe there are special adjustments that she doesn't master, but, comparing with other software, GF didn't bring as much detail.

In these experiments, originals were only 640x480 or 1280x960 pix images, so maybe results are much better with larger images.

If I need to make small upsizing (10-15%), I use PSP's "Smart size" (I don't use PS) with no visible loss of quality.

Regards,
Adelaide


Ignore | Logged


eendicott


« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2007, 16:13 »

I agree with the Professor  Grin

I've upsized using bicubic interpolation and I've upsized using ACR - both are acceptable for Alamy.  I also have Genuine Fractals.  You do get better detail using Genuine Fractals and I use it more frequently than any other method.  There is another program I have heard of people using called 'Blow Up' that is supposed to get better results than Genuine Fractals but I have not tried it.  I've also heard the Fred Miranda plug-in is on par with Genuine Fractals but have not used it either.

If you are using bicubic interpolation for Alamy - you want to (roughly) have a long edge of 5025 - that's usually my starting point.

Good Luck!

Logged


ovbg

New Member


« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2007, 05:09 »

Thanks for your help guys.
 Smiley


Ignore | Logged


madelaide
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2007, 17:41 »

The following images are excerpts from a 640x480 image upsized in 100% with GF, Blow Up and a $20 software - not shown in this order.  I'll let you enjoy them and make your own judgements (and preferences regarding the resulting texture may vary) before unveiling which one is which.

The original image is a JPEG from my old Finepix 2650 camera, saved to TIFF and then resized.  The montages were saved in minimum compression.

Regards,
Adelaide

PS: I can't upload both in the same message due to size limitations.


Ignore | Logged


madelaide
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2007, 17:42 »

The other comparison file.


Ignore | Logged


CJPhoto


« Reply #9 on: April 03, 2007, 03:19 »

oops--hit the wrong stupid button.
At least you can find the "stupid button".  I cant find any on my keyboard.

I dont do Alamy yet but know of people you just use the bicubic in one step and have no problem with acceptances.


Ignore | Logged


madelaide
« Reply #10 on: April 04, 2007, 19:50 »

Hmmm.  Nobody interested in the software comparison?

Regards,
Adelaide


Ignore | Logged


CJPhoto


« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2007, 00:55 »

Hmmm.  Nobody interested in the software comparison?

Regards,
Adelaide
I couldnt see any major difference. they are different but quality seems ok in all. i am not a pixel peeper though.


Ignore | Logged


Microstock InsiderEnvateo Photo Tools
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
IS rejection for upsizing
iStockPhoto.com
madelaide 3 1069 Last post October 31, 2007, 16:53
by madelaide
Photoshop Elements Question
Photoshop Discussion
rjphoto 4 1126 Last post January 01, 2008, 14:33
by strikerx98
Aobe Photoshop 7.0 question...
Photoshop Discussion
RM 0 723 Last post January 31, 2008, 15:19
by RM
PhotoShop Question
Photoshop Discussion
Pixart 16 2580 Last post September 24, 2008, 09:01
by Pixart
Photoshop commercial brushes question
General Photography Discussion
deyu16 2 732 Last post March 02, 2010, 04:58
by Phil

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc