Digital BW, The Print

on 8/20/01 4:39 PM, Paul Roark wrote:

> I thought I'd add my 2 cents worth regarding Genuine Fractals.
> 
> I use it, and it is better than trying to increase resolution in Photoshop
> with it's algorithms.  However, GF is no substitute for a good scanner.  It
> is very good at preserving sharp edges.  However, it can't manufacture the
> fine detail.  So, between the sharp edges, the image still suffers if the
> original scan does not have enough information to look sharp.

I haven't done the comparisons myself, but here's my understanding based
upon lurking some lists. Anyone is welcome to correct me based upon first
hand knowledge.

GF is supposed to perform better on sharp lined objects, while PS bicubic
does better with smooth tones. Thus for text, and perhaps landscapes, one
should expect GF to be the superior method. However, skintones/portraits
would be better served by bicubic interpolation.

If such is accurate, it seems there is not a one-size-fits-all tool for the
job, and it might be wise to use different methods on different images.

Todd