Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 13, 2004, 1:42 AM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6
Default

be careful how you enlarge digital pictures. the digital enlargement capabilities of most digital cameras is rather crude. digital cameras use a crude photo enlargement method that is also used by photoshop called bi-cubic interpolation. you can read more about this here: http://photoenlargement.imagener.com.

i have used one photo enlargement program with great success called imagener. you can find it here: http://www.imagener.com. hope this helps! -dh


Lin Evans wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
I suppose there are several types of noise pattern, and some are quite visible on screen, but can hardly been seen on prints; while others are just as visible in both formats. (Is this true?) That would means that there are cameras that 'specialise' in printing, and others that do not.
Actually, most noise which can be seen on screen is pretty much invisible on print. There really are not cameras which "specialize" in printing, it's just we tend to forget that what we look at on screen at 100% is the equivalence with a five megapixel camera of a 35 inch wide print, and no one in their right mind expects to print a 35 inch image from a five megapixel camera.

It's not necessary to make a huge print to see how one would look, we can simply enlarge to wichever print size we want to investigate, crop a small section and print the crop.

The interesting thing is that the majority of those who go on and on about noise in this camera or that camera have done exactly what I did for the demonstration of the noise pattern above. They enlarge by a factor of 300 or 400 percent and see the results and never once stop to think that what they are seeing would only appear in print if the print were 142.2 by 106.6 inches or approximately 12 x 9 feet!

The bottom line is that noise in print from a digital camera is something we rarely see unless the image was captured at a very high ISO.

Best regards,

Lin
donhdefl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 1:43 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6
Default

there is a product that can reduce the noise of digital images. i have used one noise reduction program with great success called imagener. you can find it here: http://www.imagener.com. hope this helps! -dI
donhdefl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 6:02 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
pwiles1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 24
Default

donhdefl wrote:
Quote:
be careful how you enlarge digital pictures. the digital enlargement capabilities of most digital cameras is rather crude. digital cameras use a crude photo enlargement method that is also used by photoshop called bi-cubic interpolation. you can read more about this here: http://photoenlargement.imagener.com.

i have used one photo enlargement program with great success called imagener. you can find it here: http://www.imagener.com. hope this helps! -dh



Here is a good article on enlarging (interpolation) of images

http://www.americaswonderlands.com/image_resizing.htm

And Neat Image is good for noise. Did I mention it was Free for home use.

http://www.neatimage.com/index.html

Apparently if you use Photoshop to enlarge images but do in in 10% stepsyou do notsoften or blur the image :shock:i.e. 10% then another 10% you get the idea.
pwiles1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 8:22 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

donhdefl wrote:
Quote:
be careful how you enlarge digital pictures. the digital enlargement capabilities of most digital cameras is rather crude. digital cameras use a crude photo enlargement method that is also used by photoshop called bi-cubic interpolation. you can read more about this here:
Actually, I respectfully disagree on this point. Photo editors give you choices regarding the method of enlargement - "nearest neighbor" in PS, for example, gives pretty lousy results (not even sure why it's there).

However, BI (bicubic interpolation), ain't bad. It has its limitations, however, and I would peg adding around 100% fake pixels about right before obvious image degredation occurs. Several Fugi cameras that claimed 6 megapixel "resolution" only contained a 3 megapixel CCD. In those cameras 50% of the pixels were "fake" added through BI, and these cameras were known to be good consumer digicams with very good image quality, right up there with the rest.

There are lots of enlargement vendors out there. Genuine Fractals being "the standard" non-bi enlargement software. Like the link you provided, all these vendors say the same thing in their site "...ours is the best, forget about the rest (especially BI)". However, there are lots of folks who, like Lynn, took the time to do some tests among them all. Differeces are very subtle, and something that you wouldn't generally notice in a print (if you used X vendor's enlargement software, or standard BI).

In the case of GF, it's pretty much known that on regular size prints it doesn't provide much improvement on PS's BI method, but does a much, much better taking a large file (say, 40 meg) with lots of data and making huge, huge prints out of it.

It's a somewhat controversial topic, but in my experience after trying a few of these programs:

1. Don't be afraid to "up the res" up to 100% using BI.
2. For "regular size" enlargements, BI holds up pretty well to the expensive 3rd party stuff

The purpose of interpolation and other methods isn't to "add detail", rather its goal is to preserve the detail you have while increasing pixel counts/density. The ability to do this at a 1 (fake): 1 (real) pixel ratio is pretty impressive imo.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:45 PM.