I have used it occasionally as I have the complete suite. You should be able to download a trial to see what you think and whether it will work for you
With proper PS techniques/sharpening, CS5 does an incredible job at up-sizing photos. I have used it to go from 30MP to a massive 220MP file without issue. The print is incredible. Yes, I have very high standards, too.
Bifurcator wrote:
You do? What's your typical workflow that you up-scale every image?
Up-scale every image? What makes you say that? I certainly didn't.
I use Perfect Resize to resize (as the name implies) final output. Before printing, every image needs to be sized accordingly, and that can be up or down, depending on print size. I also use PR for web/e-mail-sized images.
I can't think of any occasion where the native file was exactly what was needed, but I suppose that could happen.
Bifurcator wrote:
Because the tool is specifically designed for enlargements so I just assumed.
Perfect Resize is not designed specifically for enlarging, although it enlarges very well and OnOne does feature that in advertising.
Internally, the bitmap image is converted to vectors that can be scaled up or down virtually free of artifacts. Also, there are sharpening options for output that are specific to web/e-mail, handheld devices and various printer/paper types.
I own the tool, I know what it does. I wouldn't say "free of artifacts". It's a little better at upscaling than PS. For down scaling there is no difference. The current version can assist for cropping to specific paper sizes if one is in need of that - of course there are free scripts hat do this as well. And yeah, historically speaking when the guy wrote it he said it's purpose was up-scaling or "enlarging" raster files beyond what the current/common tools could do. He succeeded.
If a person needs to display at around 150 to 200% for some reason then it's worth it. If someone wants to print large-ish images (about B4) from their 4mpx camera or from small-ish crops then it's worth it.
OnOne has enhanced the functionality beyond the original Genuine Fractals, and I did preface “free of artifacts” with the word virtually. I find reductions to be more pleasing than what’s provided by PS, but that’s probably a subjective judgement.
The new version also runs "smoother" it seems. Perfect Resize 7 was always sluggish and the crop tool kept resetting on my computer. The new version is snappy and no crop tool issues. The upgrade cost me $49 so I'm happy with this new version.
philhill wrote:
OnOne has enhanced the functionality beyond the original Genuine Fractals, and I did preface “free of artifacts” with the word virtually. I find reductions to be more pleasing than what’s provided by PS, but that’s probably a subjective judgement.
Virtually... not sure what that means. But at 200% up scale you can begin to see the artifacts on screen and in print. At 400% OMG it's frigging terrible. Even the image in the promo video where they show the guy with the big and bigger prints is just awful! At that point it's not better than PS... just funky and different. At 200% I think it's better than PS at 200% though. But that seems to be the cut-off point right around 200%...
For down-scaling I still contend it's no better than PS. Ya, there is sharpening available but it's the worst algorithm on the planet maybe. It might be ok-ish for print output but then you probably would not be downsizing - thus null. Here's a comparison of 25% scales from PS with sharpening, PR7.5 with sharpening, and one from each just downsizing without any sharpening:
25% scale using Perfect Resize 7.5 - With Sharpening
25% scale using Photoshop CS 5.5 - With Smart Sharpening
25% scale using Perfect Resize 7.5 - No Sharpening Added
25% scale using Photoshop CS 5.5 - No Sharpening Added
Bifurcator wrote:
Virtually... not sure what that means.
You could have looked it up, but here’s what Merriam Webster says:
Definition of VIRTUALLY
1: almost entirely: nearly
2: for all practical purposes <virtually unknown>
I don’t see anything controversial here, or anything to debate. OP asked whether anybody was using the software and I simply responded. For whatever reason(s), PR works better for me than PS. Perhaps it’s a better fit with the sharpening software that I use, or perhaps it’s because I rarely (if ever) make 200%+ enlargements. Regardless, I stand behind my original comments in response to the OP.
