COHappyHiker

Does anyone have opinions about the best enlargement software?

CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida

Many folks ask about this and many other photo related jobs, both minor and major changes. I suggest Photoshop/Lightroom and then whatever you need, you have. You may need to learn a bit but the tool is there.

COHappyHiker

I have both - I was wondering if an additional software would be beneficial.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

If you have that suite, you have everything you need. When you master these tools, then it may be time to look at other products for specific purposes. If you’re not yet noticing a specific shortcoming, you’re likely not at a point where you need anything else.

Andy

COHappyHiker

Thank you!

COHappyHiker

By photo enlargement, I really mean pixel enhancement - is that still covered by PS and LR?

Hamltnblue Loc: Springfield PA

I believe On1 Resize is considered the best.

Bill_de Loc: US

I had it when it was a free standing program, Genuine Fractals. At the time it was really the only game in town. On1 uses the Genuine Fractal technology. If there is one better I haven't heard of it. It can be used as a Lightroom plugin.

--

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

"Enlargement" might be an old wet darkroom technique. "Resizing" seems more like what you might do with digital. Do some YouTubing and Google searching on Photoshop resizing techniques. The algorithms have changed over time and are exceptionally good in current versions.

Bill_de Loc: US

Enlargement is correct. Resizing could mean enlargement or shrinking.

---

bleirer

I've done it successfully with Photoshop for larger prints, the image menu/image size, click the resample box. Bicubic automatic is good. Sharpen after, not before, smart sharpen. There's a calculator here to help decide the sharpening radius. https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-photo-enlargement.htm

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

The first enlargement software I used was Genuine Fractals (now named On1 Resize), and for many years it was the best on the market. Photoshop then improved their version named Preserve Details 2.0, and that also worked very well. Recently Topaz introduced AI Gigapixel which is phenomenal and IMHO far and away the best in the market.

Here's a link to my more detailed post on this software: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-548720-1.html

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

There is another that can compare to Genuine Fractal.. Photozoom. The two are neck and neck and far better than any old fashion Adobe product. Topaz has entered the game with Gigapixel

The last years 6 [new is 7] edition can be had at a lower cost via Ashampoo. $21
https://www.ashampoo.com/en/usd/pin/partner0106/partner-software/photozoom-6

For many things how good is good and how expensive is expensive. For most of us the $21 Photozoom 6 will do the job well. PS and LR are far behind according to some reviews... Do your Google and reading and find out.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Technically you aren't making bigger pixels, just putting space between the existing pixels and letting the software take it's best guess from what is adjacent to the spaces - aka interpolation. What programs like Genuine Fractals/ON1 Perfect Resize and others do is adjust contrast at edges and provide good antialiasing so linear elements that are not perfectly vertical or horizontal, or curved elements appear without the "stair-stepping" effect that comes when you do extreme resizing. Resizing software also increases high frequency contrast at transitions and removes artifacts and noise - providing a "cleaner", "sharper" appearance.

That being said, for modest resizing upwards, the resizing algorithms in Photoshop and Lightroom are pretty good. Photoshop gives you a choice as to which interpolation you can use, Lightroom doesn't.

One thing that the software will NOT do is add detail. If you didn't capture it applying resizing software isn't magically going to put it back. Any image with a lot of texture (small frequency detail) just looks weird when resized with any technique.

Also, if you are sending your work out to a commercial lab, their RIP (Raster Image Processor) will do the same enhancements on a modest up-res without needing to process the image.

The number of ppi you need when you make your prints bigger decreases as you increase the print size because it is presumed that your viewing distance increases as well. A 4"x6" print will need around 360 ppi to look sharp, while a 40x60 only needs around 32 ppi for acceptable results, and anything higher would put it in the excellent category.

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

One last thing - if you are printing your own work, Qimage software will optimize the image for printing, doing a lot of the same enhancements a commercial RIP will do.

This article compares a few resizing programs, including Photoshop CC with Preserve Details enabled.

https://photographylife.com/how-to-increase-the-resolution-of-an-image

In any case, I usually get more controllable results by adjusting the microcontrast and applying the correct amount of sharpening and de-noising in an image. It's not uncommon for an image to require different amounts of enhancement in different areas.

But don't expect a cellphone image resized to higher mp to look like it was taken with a Phase One IQ4 150MP medium format camera. It won't.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I use photoshop to sharpen my images, but don't sharpen too much, it can lead to all kinds of bad results.