Post by: sandbox on March 05, 2007, 07:04:02 PM
http://www.ononesoftware.com/detail.php?prodLine_id=2
Post by: Gregg on March 05, 2007, 07:38:31 PM
Wouldn't the photo paper be a bit on the expensive side though?
Post by: jcarter on March 05, 2007, 07:48:35 PM
Post by: sandbox on March 06, 2007, 05:43:02 AM
QUOTE(Gregg @ Mar 5 2007, 08:38 PM) [snapback]121029[/snapback]
That sounds amazing!
Wouldn't the photo paper be a bit on the expensive side though?
Wouldn't the photo paper be a bit on the expensive side though?
Gregg, posters are expensive in comparison to an 8x11 inch picture, as an 8x11 inch picture is expensive compared to a 3x5 inch picture. The more paper/surface and ink you use the more the product costs.
The example I viewed happened to be printed on a shade, made of vinyl. The concept was to have a mural to pull down in a window instead of just having a blank-scape.
A photo was taken of a wall inside a doorway with a table and vase and picture in frame. The photo was then blown up to duplicate the scene behind the shade, so that when the shade is drawn what appears in the glass door replicates what’s on the wall behind it.
Post by: Gregg on March 06, 2007, 07:41:46 AM
Post by: Xairbusdriver on March 06, 2007, 09:26:01 AM
I would imaging that the process requires a great deal of computing power, of course.
Post by: sandbox on March 06, 2007, 10:07:13 AM
Post by: kimmer on March 06, 2007, 11:35:58 AM
Post by: tacit on March 06, 2007, 12:10:18 PM
Genuine Fractals produces results that are moderately better than Photoshop's built-in interpolation for some images--emphasis on "moderately" and "some images." On some images, the results produced by Genuine Fractals are worse.
Of course, you won't see that in Genuine Fractals advertising. Part of advertising a piece of software is in carefully choosing data that makes your software look best. I used to demo software at trade shows, and we would be very, very careful about the samples we used in the demos. I have known cases were people who are giving software demos will pay their own employees to act like audience members and to ask questions designed to give the person running the demo a chance to show off some particular, obscure data set or procedure that really makes the program look good.
Some images benefit from Genuine Fractals; some don't. In any event, if you blow up an image using Photoshop's bicubic interpolation, you won't see pixels either--the image simply looks soft and slightly out of focus, just as it does with Genuine Fractals. Nothing, however, will ever look as good as simply making the image at the right resolution in the first place!
I became disenchanted with Genuine Fractals, and believed that the company is unethical and practices snake-oil salesmanship, when I saw one of their brochures. The brochure had a lot of pairs of pictures. In each pair, one picture was scanned at high resolution, and one was scanned at low resolution and blown up using Genuine Fractals. The brochure challenged viewers to guess which one was high res and which one was enlarged.
I guessed correctly on every image. However, every image enlarged with Genuine Fractals looked better. Why? Because the images scanned at high resolution were not sharpened. The images enlarged with Genuine Fractals were blown up and then sharpened. Everyone who works prepress knows that any picture printed on a press must be sharpened. The company was trying to skew the results. If they would have sharpened the high-res scans the way they sharpened the blown-up pictures, the high-res scans would have looked better.
People keep looking for a quick fix. There is none. if you want a high-quality image, you must start with a high-quality, high-resolution original. There is no shortcut.
Post by: sandbox on March 06, 2007, 05:27:00 PM
The photo used was taken at 300 resolutions I was told. There are still samples coming in, some are better than others of course, as is the price, ranging from $1-2 hundred dollars per segement x 34 segments per set of panoramas, x ? sets if memory serves. Could be 100 segments when it’s finished.
You can always fly down from the mainland and have a closer look, the pool is heated.
Post by: Gregg on March 06, 2007, 07:36:25 PM
QUOTE(tacit @ Mar 6 2007, 12:10 PM) [snapback]121117[/snapback]
Nothing--no technique, no algorithm, and no program--can take a small image and blow it up without degrading quality. It is not even theoretically possible. There is no way to add detail to an image that does not exist in the original.
Not even if you use pixel dust? :fairy:
