Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 10, 2012, 23:54

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print

Topic: Upsizing without loss of quality  

(Read 1783 times)
Magnum


iStock Gauge
« on: July 14, 2010, 04:20 »

Im arguing with a guy at Mp about upsizing. He says Canon has a software that makes it possible to upsize a RAW photo almost unlimited without visible degradation.

I want that software for nikon as well Wink

Do anyone know what he may be talking about? 


Ignore | Logged


DepositPhotos.com
sharpshot


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2010, 05:19 »

Sounds like BS to me Smiley  You can upsize raw files using Digital Photo Professional but there is degradation with any software, photoshop is probably just as good.


Ignore | Logged


etienjones


« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2010, 05:33 »

Genuine Fractals is considered the best at upsizing but if the truth be known it is only marginally better than Photoshop (using the 10% rule, which is upsizing 10% then upsizing 10% again, etc, etc) The fact is, you just can't ask a program to add pixels and keep the quality beyond increases of ~ 50% max.


Ignore | Logged


click_click


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2010, 07:21 »

...He says Canon has a software that makes it possible to upsize a RAW photo almost unlimited without visible degradation....

Yes, it's a fictional software programmed in the future around the year 3500. By then Canon will have developed a sensor that works analog and not digital anymore hence the possibility to upsize without quality loss.

The "native" resolution equals to a 7.000 TeraPixel image and a 128-bit color depth. One image requires 3 Petabytes in hard drive storage. Once upsized to 100 times the "original" size in order to create a banner that wraps around the world 5 times you need a hard drive that holds about 345 Zettabytes.

The estimated price will be around $7.000 (plus tax). A bargain compared to Nikon's counterpart which probably will sell for $200.000 (plus tax).
I don't know why Canon is usually cheaper than Nikon...

P.S. If the guy IS right, send me a PM with the name of the software company - I hope they have some shares left because then I won't have to do microstock anymore for a living.


Ignore | Logged


microstockphoto.co.uk


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2010, 09:05 »

almost unlimited?

nice! then I can shoot a single picture of the world and from them zoom in and crop and upsize and create all the future pictures in my port
« Last Edit: July 14, 2010, 09:08 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

Ignore | Logged


click_click


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2010, 09:08 »

almost unlimited?

nice! then I can shoot a single picture of the world and from them zoom in and crop and upsize and create all the future pictures in my port

Yeah you can easily put Google Earth/Maps out of business that way! Awesome idea.


Ignore | Logged


Magnum


iStock Gauge
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2010, 09:37 »

almost unlimited?

nice! then I can shoot a single picture of the world and from them zoom in and crop and upsize and create all the future pictures in my port

Ha ha, Slightly exaggerated maybe...

Quote " The guy"

" But taken in RAW then developed in tiff or tga it would be zoomable up to 500 time before noticeable degredation and I cant for the world figgure out why you would zoom that much and to what use."

500 times Huh  Even if he means 500% it´s quite a lot...


Ignore | Logged


microstockphoto.co.uk


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2010, 09:56 »

almost unlimited?

nice! then I can shoot a single picture of the world and from them zoom in and crop and upsize and create all the future pictures in my port

Ha ha, Slightly exaggerated maybe...

Quote " The guy"

" But taken in RAW then developed in tiff or tga it would be zoomable up to 500 time before noticeable degredation and I cant for the world figgure out why you would zoom that much and to what use."

500 times Huh  Even if he means 500% it´s quite a lot...

hope he means 500% - even in that case, it depends on the kind of image: some photos with smooth gradients upsize well with special 'fractal' algorithms, while others with lots of detail result in ugly artifacts.


Ignore | Logged


click_click


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2010, 10:08 »

almost unlimited?

nice! then I can shoot a single picture of the world and from them zoom in and crop and upsize and create all the future pictures in my port

Ha ha, Slightly exaggerated maybe...

Quote " The guy"

" But taken in RAW then developed in tiff or tga it would be zoomable up to 500 time before noticeable degredation and I cant for the world figgure out why you would zoom that much and to what use."

500 times Huh  Even if he means 500% it´s quite a lot...

He is talking out of his butt. I'm sure he is not referring to an image that is just one big gradient. Therefore he has no clue what he is talking about.


Ignore | Logged


Microstock InsiderArt portfolio websites - Foundmyself
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
IS rejection for upsizing
iStockPhoto.com
madelaide 3 1024 Last post October 31, 2007, 16:53
by madelaide
how to reduce money loss in you peyouts with dollar/euro exchange and paypal?
General Stock Discussion
arquiplay77 19 2732 Last post June 14, 2009, 15:18
by tilo
Please Help with Application. I am at a loss.
iStockPhoto.com
mybaitshop 14 1622 Last post September 11, 2009, 04:12
by Gannet77
Isn't upsizing nonsense? « 1 2 »
Alamy.com
olikli 38 4285 Last post February 23, 2010, 19:57
by Phil
Leveraged result of sales loss
iStockPhoto.com
BaldricksTrousers 7 632 Last post September 12, 2010, 04:52
by BaldricksTrousers

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc