Hey there,
I don't know if some of you may know BlowUp from Alienskin.
It has a really nice enlargening algorithm. It somehow detects lines in your image and generates a mesh which is used for sharpening/pinching edges. I think this may be similar to this here. http://imagemagick.org/Usage/misc/#mesh
I also have read that -adaptive-resize uses the mesh interpolation for resizing. For not to large resizing this works pretty good and gives very nice and clean results. But for bigger upscaling blow up gives much cleaner results.
Is it somehow possible to say how much the adaptive-resize operator pinches the edges?
It would be great if some of you guys can give me some advice!
Alienskin BlowUp like enlargening?
-
- Posts: 12159
- Joined: 2010-01-23T23:01:33-07:00
- Authentication code: 1151
- Location: England, UK
Re: Alienskin BlowUp like enlargening?
I initally ignored this post, thinking it was spam!
Anthony comments (http://imagemagick.org/Usage/resize/#adaptive-resize) that "-adaptive-resize" is useful only in the range of 50% magnification. I've never used it, but some of my video work calls for very small magnifications, so I'll try it out.
I note that BlowUp costs $149, as add-on to Photoshop. (https://app.alienskin.com/store/)
You may be interested in discussions about enlargements over at viewforum.php?f=22 . There are many trade-offs in getting the "best" enlargements. I reckon outputs almost always need some degree of sharpening, so I'm not too fussed about whether an enlarging process isn't as sharp as it might be. I'm more bothered by introduced artefacts such as ringing.
Anthony comments (http://imagemagick.org/Usage/resize/#adaptive-resize) that "-adaptive-resize" is useful only in the range of 50% magnification. I've never used it, but some of my video work calls for very small magnifications, so I'll try it out.
I note that BlowUp costs $149, as add-on to Photoshop. (https://app.alienskin.com/store/)
You may be interested in discussions about enlargements over at viewforum.php?f=22 . There are many trade-offs in getting the "best" enlargements. I reckon outputs almost always need some degree of sharpening, so I'm not too fussed about whether an enlarging process isn't as sharp as it might be. I'm more bothered by introduced artefacts such as ringing.
snibgo's IM pages: im.snibgo.com