The point everyone seems to be missing is that this is only a 2x upsize at the most. No need for a lot of exotic stuff. And I have not noticed that GF or Stepping does all that much better than Bicubic Smoother. Converting from RAW is a bit better, but not miraculously so. While I do not print 16x20's I do often crop that much. This is not rocket science, for crying out loud.
graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" ----------------------------------- P. J. Alling wrote: > I think it would depend on three things. 1.) Subject matter, a very > detailed photo will loose a lot upresed that much, while a less detailed > shot might be fine. 2,) Viewing distance. If viewed from a reasonable > distance it will look fine. Close up flaws will be very apparent. 3.) > The method used to upres the shot. Genuine Fractals is supposed to work > miracles, stepwise bicubic interpolation is supposed to work almost as > well, (and is available to anyone willing to make a Photoshop action). > You could try resizing using the second method to get a reasonable pixel > density for your purposes then crop out a sample size and print it to > see if it would work. > > David J Brooks wrote: >> I can't seem to fiqure out the math on this and don't want to quess, >> but can anyone tell me what size i need to uprez a 2000 x 1300 file to >> print 16x20. >> >> If a 2.74 D1H file can be resized that big. >> >> A client wants this size for her company wall. >> >> Dave >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
