Resizing software

[Phil Robinson 841]

Many years ago I read that image resizing in Photoshop was not great and a program like Genuine Fractals gave much better results.

Since then I have always used GF for resizing my images, largely out of habit, but I have just updated my Photoshop Elements and was wondering if it is really necessary.

I'm sure PS has been greatly improved over its many incarnations since then.

 

Does anyone else use GF for resizing or is it not worth the bother?

[Martin Carlsson 429]

I've not used Genuine Fractals for probably 7-10 years? Not sure what you are going to do, as one don't really have to upscale for Alamy anymore. Regardless, I'm sure that PS is quite capable, but for the "outmost", plugins such GF can perhaps manage to do it slightly better - I presume, as they are still around and charge $69-$99 for it (my simple logic). Good luck!

Edited September 1, 2017 by Martin Carlsson

[Phil Robinson 841]

I still have the GF disc I got years ago and could reinstall it if I wanted to (I suppose) but I don't think it's worth it.

Most resizing now is downwards anyway.

[Martin P Wilson 1,131]

When GF was in vogue (in the days of 4-8Mpixel cameras) I recall several magazines and others running tests comparing its results with PS (including the iterative upsizing and single step methods). They generally came to the conclusion that PS in a single step using bicubic interpolation gave as good results as any. That was what I used when I had to upsize for Alamy, from Canon 1D or the like, and had no QC problems. As has been said there is no longer really much need for upsizing now that 16-24Mpixels or more is the norm.

Edited September 1, 2017 by Martin P Wilson

[Jansos 546]

16 hours ago, Martin P Wilson said:

When GF was in vogue (in the days of 4-8Mpixel cameras) I recall several magazines and others running tests comparing its results with PS (including the iterative upsizing and single step methods). They generally came to the conclusion that PS in a single step using bicubic interpolation gave as good results as any. That was what I used when I had to upsize for Alamy, from Canon 1D or the like, and had no QC problems. As has been said there is no longer really much need for upsizing now that 16-24Mpixels or more is the norm.

Showing my ignorance here. Does that mean it is possible to upsize 4-5Mb photos so that they meet the Alamy QC standard? Thx. John

[Martin P Wilson 1,131]

47 minutes ago, Jansos said:

Showing my ignorance here. Does that mean it is possible to upsize 4-5Mb photos so that they meet the Alamy QC standard? Thx. John

 

It used to be possible but whether they would pass QC now is questionable. The QC threshold has steadily risen with technology improvements. I don't think I would even try now to get 4-5Mpixeel images accepted, even from a pro camera of the time.

[spacecadet 2,538]

31 minutes ago, Martin P Wilson said:

 

It used to be possible but whether they would pass QC now is questionable. The QC threshold has steadily risen with technology improvements. I don't think I would even try now to get 4-5Mpixeel images accepted, even from a pro camera of the time.

But now you only have to upsize to 6.

Even some of my, quite frankly, evil-looking 14MP/400ISOs from 2009-13 would probably survive downsizing to that.

[Jansos 546]

7 hours ago, Martin P Wilson said:

 

It used to be possible but whether they would pass QC now is questionable. The QC threshold has steadily risen with technology improvements. I don't think I would even try now to get 4-5Mpixeel images accepted, even from a pro camera of the time.

OK, seems sensible and will save me a ton of conversion work. Thx! :-)

[alphaomega 22]

Never actually seen Alamy stating that their quality requirements have been raised. On the contrary, they have reduced size requirements from 48Mb TIFF to Jpeg, to 24Mb Jpeg and then finally to 17Mb Jpeg. I would  assume that If  I reduced all the TIFF 48Mb images I had passed by Alamy then to 17Mb and re-submitted they would pass.

 

I unconsiously think they have and probably make my submissions better than the minimum now, but then the better they are the better it will be. Provide the customer with the best you can do will probably enhance sales opportunities - everything else being equal.

[Rick Lewis 139]

Genuine Fractals is now On1 Perfect Resize.  I bought it a couple of years ago because I was shooting a lot of family portraits to be printed on canvas and was using a 12MP Nikon D3.  Some of my canvas orders were for very large sizes.  

 

Since then I just use PS CC to upres if needed and cannot tell the difference in quality.  I think Adobe upped their game.  Or, my eyesight is getting worse. :-)  

[vpics 572]

Haven't used GF for a long time. It's Photoshop bicubic all the way.