Interpolation Software

The23rdman

The23rdman

Suspended / Banned
Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
What are the accepted best programs out there for enlargements these days? Is there anything significantly better than LR or PS?
 
The23rdman said:
What are the accepted best programs out there for enlargements these days? Is there anything significantly better than LR or PS?
Click to expand...


Some make some wild claims.. that don't stand up to scrutiny.

How big is the enlargement? Do you actually need to interpolate?
 
Pookeyhead said:
Some make some wild claims.. that don't stand up to scrutiny.

How big is the enlargement? Do you actually need to interpolate?
Click to expand...
The reason I'm asking is that I'm seriously considering buying another D700 because none of the more advanced Nikon DSLRs fit me as well. The only issue is that at times I need more resolution for clients and if there is any cropping needed on a shot I'm left with less leeway for print enlargements. If the software has improved though...
 
The23rdman said:
The reason I'm asking is that I'm seriously considering buying another D700 because none of the more advanced Nikon DSLRs fit me as well. The only issue is that at times I need more resolution for clients and if there is any cropping needed on a shot I'm left with less leeway for print enlargements. If the software has improved though...
Click to expand...


Well... 12mp is pushing it for big prints, but how big do your clients often ask for? A D700 is good for A3 if you're sensible with the files... A2 at a push.. just... if you squint at it a bit. Then again, if you've cropped into a D700 image, then you're probably screwed in the big print department, yes.

There's no magic software that will let you shoot a D700 and print A1 if that's what you're after. Then again, I'm sure there'll be others along shortly to tell you that they printed something from a D700 as big as a house, and it looked great... you'll also get people saying you can print as big as you want because big prints should be viewed from a larger distance.. as if you can physically control how people will view the print (which you can't). It's all down to what you accept as sufficient quality. This varies highly. I've seen some people's prints and I shudder at the horrible, horrible quality, and they are convinced it's brilliant. (shrug).

Still not sure what you mean by other's don't "fit". A D810 is around the same size, weight, very similar layout... what exactly is it that doesn't fit?
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Well... 12mp is pushing it for big prints, but how big do your clients often ask for? A D700 is good for A3 if you're sensible with the files.

There's no magic software that will let you shoot a D700 and print A1 if that's what you're after. Then again, I'm sure there'll be others along shortly to tell you that they printed something from a D700 as big as a house, and it looked great... you'll also get people saying you can print as big as you want because big prints should be viewed from a larger distance.. as if you can physically control how people will view the print. It's all down to what you accept as sufficient quality. This varies highly. I've seen some people's prints and I shudder at the horrible, horrible quality, and they are convinced it's brilliant. (shrug).

Still not sure what you mean by other's don't "fit". A D810 is around the same size, weight, very similar layout... what exactly is it that doesn't fit?
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. The issue is that I'm often chasing children around which results in the occasional need to crop fairly heavily. I have had clients ask for A2 canvases from a file that is essentially about 6/8mp after cropping. Yes, the D800 would appear to fit the bill for that, but the file size would mean I'd need to invest in another PC. I've just started again from scratch and I don't have the budget for that yet. I'm looking for a stopgap really.
 
Plus I don't have the budget for a D810 either yet.
 
Steve Smith said:
You can't add detail which isn't there.
Steve.
Click to expand...
That is what interpolation software does. Generate information from neighbouring pixels that wasn't there.

I don't know how good the software is today. If you have a black line at 45 degrees on a white background, with steps of 1 pixel, can it work out that that it needs to keep 1x1 pixel steps rather than have 2x2 steps? Naturally a real photograph is more challenging.

How often this will be needed? And is it better, perhaps, not to crop in too close at the initial stage, raising customers expectations?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
That is what interpolation software does. Generate information from neighbouring pixels that wasn't there.
Click to expand...
•
Not exactly…
it is more like subdividing a pixel and making 4 out of it for a 1.4/doubling ratio.
 
FML, 4mp D2hs used to do billboard prints!!!

D700 is awesome for large prints, do be sucked in by the MP nonsense. It could do A0 perfectly.

The best interpolation software is built into commercial printers :)
 
andyscott said:
FML, 4mp D2hs used to do billboard prints!!!

D700 is awesome for large prints, do be sucked in by the MP nonsense. It could do A0 perfectly.

The best interpolation software is built into commercial printers :)
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that's exactly the kind of answer David was talking about and it isn't my experience at all. Billboards are viewed from miles away whereas a canvas costing a client a small fortune needs to be excellent at all distances to pass the grade.

Interesting re printers though.
 
D700 did canvas brilliantly as did the D2X, right up to the point another camera was released ;)

Canvas medium is inherently soft and lacks detail anyway.

If you really want to print big then shoot MF digital or film.
 
andyscott said:
D700 did canvas brilliantly as did the D2X, right up to the point another camera was released ;)

Canvas medium is inherently soft and lacks detail anyway.

If you really want to print big then shoot MF digital or film.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your input. :)
 
I was going to say "what about "Genuine Fractals" which was the best last time I looked and uses fractal pattern recognition to generate missing detail on the principle of it being like a smaller version of nearby similar larger detail, e.g. it will recognise diagonal lines and do them properly. I then discovered that they renamed it "Perfect Resize" and charged more.

I sympathise with the computer upgrading problem. I had two computers which happily coped with 10MP images. They slowed down proportionally when I went to 14MP. When I went to 24MP they not only slowed down horribly but started crashing occasionally. An upgrade recovered some of the speed, but it's clear that I need a more radical and expensive upgrade. I'll end up having had to spend a lot more on upgrading the photographic computer than buying the camera which necessitated the upgrade.
 
Okay, I've just done some testing and the results suggest that the engine built into the latest iteration of Lightroom produces results superior to Perfect Resize. I'll get some prints done and see what they look like.

Why couldn't Nikon just put a decent AF system into the D610? Bar stewards.
 
I tested GF{perfect resize) a couple of years back, at the time it just had the edge on Photoshop, but you'd probably never see it in a print, even pixel peeping it was hard to tell the difference. Since then both Photoshop and LR have moved on, now Photoshop/LR just has the edge, although I doubt you'd tell in a big print viewed from a normal viewing distance.
Q image used to be very good, but I haven't used it recently since we updated our printers.
 
swanseamale47 said:
I tested GF{perfect resize) a couple of years back, at the time it just had the edge on Photoshop, but you'd probably never see it in a print, even pixel peeping it was hard to tell the difference. Since then both Photoshop and LR have moved on, now Photoshop/LR just has the edge, although I doubt you'd tell in a big print viewed from a normal viewing distance.
Q image used to be very good, but I haven't used it recently since we updated our printers.
Click to expand...
I have done extensive testing this week, and have concluded that the latest PR is better than LR/PS. How that translates to prints I'll see soon.
 
Don't get sucked into that spending loop of trying to do things a tiny bit better for a huge outlay, Dean. The larger the print, the further away it's viewed from (or you can't see the bloody thing). I knock out 12" x 16" prints from my m43 EM-5 and can't really see how I could make them any better...... I also did a 24" x 16" acrylic of my daughter, and even to my fussy eyes, it's stunning quality. Sharpening settings have a lot more to do with 'nice' large prints than megapixels do.....
 
Last edited:
DekHog said:
Don't get sucked into that spending loop of trying to do things a tiny bit better for a huge outlay, Dean. The larger the print, the further away it's viewed from (or you can't see the bloody thing). I knock out 12" x 16" prints from my m43 EM-5 and can't really see how I could make them any better...... I also did a 24" x 16" acrylic of my daughter, and even to my fussy eyes, it's stunning quality. Sharpening settings have a lot more to do with 'nice' large prints than megapixels do.....
Click to expand...
It's not a huge outlay though.
 
DekHog said:
......until you convince yourself you need the latest and greatest camera body.... :)
Click to expand...

With all due respect, Derek, I did ask a quite simple question. I didn't ask anyone's opinion on whether my choice of path was the right one. The D700/interpolation route is out of necessity until as such time as I can afford a D810. I am incredibly demanding of my gear and happen to be the kind of person who struggles to shoot with confidence unless I know it will not let me down. I shoot fast moving subject wide open, often in crappy light - subjects that are hard to pose. That's why I need to eek out the maximum quality. If I had, say, £20k to throw at gear it wouldn't be a problem, but that's not a luxury I have and the business is going to have to justify the upgrades I will be looking for. :)
 
The23rdman said:
I have done extensive testing this week, and have concluded that the latest PR is better than LR/PS. How that translates to prints I'll see soon.
Click to expand...
So you tested enlarging software without doing any prints..... :confused:
 
The23rdman said:
Yes, the D800 would appear to fit the bill for that, but the file size would mean I'd need to invest in another PC.
Click to expand...

Have you tried working with a D800 raw file? I've used my wife's PC before now with D800 files, and it seems fine. It's an original Core i7 920 (Nahalem) with 6GB of RAM built in 2008, so it's 7 years old now. It seems perfectly fine. It's noticeably slower than my big 6 core 3960X doing certain things, but perfectly usable.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Have you tried working with a D800 raw file? I've used my wife's PC before now with D800 files, and it seems fine. It's an original Core i7 920 (Nahalem) with 6GB of RAM built in 2008, so it's 7 years old now. It seems perfectly fine. It's noticeably slower than my big 6 core 3960X doing certain things, but perfectly usable.
Click to expand...
Yes, I downloaded a few. My machine is about the same age, but an AMD Quad with 16gigs of ram. It's not terrible working on one file, but the time it would take to process an entire shoot would be hideous.

As I said, I can't afford a D810 yet and I want one of those if I was to go for a D8xx.
 
No help with software Dean and i see you have bought a D700 but the answer to your 'I wish Nikon had put a decent AF system in the D610' comment is the D750... A similar 24mp sensor but with Nikons 51 point AF system.

Good luck with your new venture mate.
 
minnnt said:
No help with software Dean and i see you have bought a D700 but the answer to your 'I wish Nikon had put a decent AF system in the D610' comment is the D750... A similar 24mp sensor but with Nikons 51 point AF system.

Good luck with your new venture mate.
Click to expand...
I still find the spread if AF points to be too small in that, but thank you. :)
 
Last edited:
What exactly is it you'll be shooting, Dean?
 
Yeah, good luck, it's probably the worst thing I can think of having tried it regularly myself!

My youngest turns into something out of The Exorcist as soon as I point a camera at her (swiveling head syndrome!) :)
 
DekHog said:
Yeah, good luck, it's probably the worst thing I can think of having tried it regularly myself!

My youngest turns into something out of The Exorcist as soon as I point a camera at her (swiveling head syndrome!) :)
Click to expand...
I love it when it comes together though. :)
 
I'm reviving this thread because I had some test prints done. I interpolated a heavily cropped D700 file that came in at 9" on the long side to 30" on the long side (as big as I offer). I then printed at 10x8 section of that file with Loxley. I'm incredibly impressed with the result through Perfect Resize. The last time I did something similar was with CS3 and the difference is remarkable.

Even at close distance the result is excellent and at normal viewing distance for a 30x20 it would be perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top