Results 1 to 10 of 10

UPsizing images - Best technique?

This is a discussion on UPsizing images - Best technique? within the Digital photography forums, part of the Photography & Fine art photography category; Curious if anyone has an opinion on the best way to upsize images? Here's 2 scenarios. I have a Nikon ...

Hybrid View

Marko UPsizing images - Best... 08-30-2013, 12:47 PM
asnow Hi Marko I've never used... 08-30-2013, 01:14 PM
Marko thanks asnow! reference... 08-30-2013, 02:18 PM
Runmonty I think one way or another... 08-30-2013, 06:13 PM
Barefoot I've mentioned Perfect Photo... 08-30-2013, 11:10 PM
Marko Appreciate the input BF -... 08-31-2013, 09:22 AM
Iguanasan I'll be interested to see the... 08-31-2013, 11:10 AM
Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Marko's Avatar
    Marko is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    14,870
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default UPsizing images - Best technique?

    Curious if anyone has an opinion on the best way to upsize images?

    Here's 2 scenarios.

    I have a Nikon D-700 - The native file resolution of my camera is 4256x2832. (12.1 MP) In camera Raw I have the ability to open up an image to this size - and the document at 300 dpi is 14.187x 9.44 inches. This is what I usually do in 16 bits.

    i ALSO have the option to open any file in camera raw at 6144 x 4088 (25.1 MP) pixels and when I do it produces a document that is 20.48 x 13.627 inches

    Seems to me that I'm definitely adding pixels in the second scenario....but I need to add pixels if i want the print larger than 14.187x 9.44 inches which i most certainly do.

    So my question is this, is it better to open the file at the UPSIZED resolution?


    OR


    Is it better to open the file in it's native resolution and upsize it in increments of 10% until I get the desired size which is around 20 x 13 inches. This is a method that i have used before to upsize but never this large.


    Curious to know if anyone has opinion on this?

    many thx!
    - Please connect with me further
    Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
    - Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
    - Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
    - Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
    - Check out the photography podcast


    "You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.

  2. #2
    asnow is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mississauga, on
    Posts
    4,977
    My Photos
    Please feel free to edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    Hi Marko

    I've never used it, but I've heard that one of the best programs for doing this is Perfect Resize (used to be call Genuine Fractals). Apparently they have some secret sauce (algorithm) for adding those pixels. Perhaps somebody has used this and can comment. My 'very' vague recollection is there is a benefit to upsizing in increments.

    Did a web search and the consensus is that doing it in increments is a myth. This may have been sightly true many years ago but not today. Two sources that say this is DPReview and Scott Kelby\Matt Kluskowski. Two sources that I believe would be reliable.
    Last edited by asnow; 08-30-2013 at 01:27 PM.

  3. #3
    Marko's Avatar
    Marko is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    14,870
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    thanks asnow!
    reference links would be appreciated if u still have them. Thx!
    Dp review is reliable only if the people posting know what they are talking about....
    - Please connect with me further
    Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
    - Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
    - Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
    - Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
    - Check out the photography podcast


    "You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.

  4. #4
    Runmonty's Avatar
    Runmonty is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    4,095
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    I think one way or another you will be adding pixels. The question is, what is the best way to add pixels. The most recent version of photoshop CC has a new upsize algorithm that is supposed to be quite good and much better than before. I did one for my niece that seemed quite good but I had nothing else to compare it to and I still havent seen the printed version.
    I welcome all critique and comments on any of my photos

    Links to other places you can also find me :


  5. #5
    Barefoot's Avatar
    Barefoot is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aiken, SC
    Posts
    2,401
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asnow View Post
    Hi Marko I've never used it, but I've heard that one of the best programs for doing this is Perfect Resize.
    I've mentioned Perfect Photo Suite (includes Perfect Resize) here a few times, but I don't think many paid much attention. I'm telling you, boys and girls, it a powerful piece of software. If you download one of their free versions of any one of the individual components you'll soon receive an offer from them to purchase the entire suite at a greatly reduced price. Worth every penny.
    We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. -Anaïs Nin

    http://barefoot.pixu.com/

  6. #6
    Marko's Avatar
    Marko is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    14,870
    My Photos
    Please do NOT edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    Appreciate the input BF - will check it out.
    - Please connect with me further
    Photo tours of Montreal - Private photography courses
    - Join the new Photography.ca Facebook page
    - Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/markokulik
    - Follow me on Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/111159185852360398018/posts
    - Check out the photography podcast


    "You have to milk the cow quite a lot, and get plenty of milk to get a little cheese." Henri Cartier-Bresson from The Decisive Moment.

  7. #7
    Iguanasan's Avatar
    Iguanasan is offline Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Halifax, NS
    Posts
    10,917
    My Photos
    Please feel free to edit my photos
    Critiques
    Critique my photos anywhere in the forum

    Default

    I'll be interested to see the results of whatever method you choose. I just listened to a photographer podcast the other day that suggested that if you simply open it in Photoshop and then double the size it nets the same result as opening it and then upping it in 10% intervals. I've tried neither but I'd be interested to know if there is a difference.
    “If you are out there shooting, things will happen for you. If you’re not out there, you’ll only hear about it.” – Jay Maisel
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Feel free to edit my shots ONLY for use on this forum and critique my shots in ANY discussion area.
    Flickr | Blog | Google+

  8. #8
    ericmark is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    North Wales. Near Chester and Wrexham
    Posts
    293
    My Photos
    Please feel free to edit my photos

    Default

    I am uncertain to if opening at 25M if you are adding pixels or if opening at 12M you are subtracting pixels? With my Nikon D7000 I do have a problem with the large RAW image size of 18M when trying to take a series of images connected direct to the PC and at 25M it would be even worse so it would seem to offer the user the option to take pictures at a lower size would be helpful with certain situations. I have needed to set to take as jpeg before now to be able to down load direct using Pentax Remote and with SM Tether it only downloads the jpeg and leaves the RAW on camera not sure what the official program does.

    I wish my D7000 allowed me to select a lower pixels RAW image your camera clearly leagues ahead of mine.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36