Joel Wilcox wrote:
> Interesting about the sharpening comment. I purchased Fred M's SI Pro
> over the weekend. I used it to downsample this image to web size. I
> often feel the need to do a tiny bit of sharpening right after
> downsampling, but not with SI Pro.
I have had SI Pro for the 300D for some time.
I work with several different sources to display on the web, and SI is
specific to individual digital cameras, so I use his WP Pro for down
sampling - have it set up in an action. I really like it in general.
It's one drawback for me is that there are only 3 sharpening settings.
Low is often just right, None occasionally best, and sometimes I want
something in between. Then I do two down samples, layer the sharpened
one on top of the other, adjust opacity of the top layer to taste,
flatten, resave and erase the work copy.
> I've seen web demos of how SI Pro works, but real life is better. Day64
> printed really well at about 12x15. I should read the documentation. I've
> been shooting from the hip.
>
I agree it's amazingly good. A couple of times, I posted some full pixel
comparisons of tests that convinced me it is better at up sampling than
anything else I have. As they contain some comparison sof different SI
Pro settings, and it does make a difference, here's the link again
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/resize.htm>.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|