Meaning, you won't notice a random tree branch out of place, but the wrong eye color or mouth shape: that stands out. but things like line art, faces, geometric patterns like wheels, can show "weirdness" because you are familiar with what they should look like. It works well on "random" scenes like sunsets, landscapes, flowers, etc. I honestly can't think of a time in the last few years where I've had a crop tight enough or a print big enough where I'd need something that heavy handed, but when trying to rescue an older or cell phone photo, it's a good option. I think it's a good option when you really need to push the pixels, even if those times may be rare these days with 24+ MP cameras. Maybe eventually the AI method will have a better data base to work from but the slow speed seems to be a big disadvantage. So if you want to geek out and do some pixel-peeping to see what this new interpolation tool has to offer, feel free to check out the video:I did and found your video very interesting, thank you! I understand that it needs visual inspection afterwards and thus not for a "automatic" running printjob. So if you want to geek out and do some pixel-peeping to see what this new interpolation tool has to offer, feel free to check out the video: Gigapixel tool versus Qimage's fusion interpolation. methods and do a lot of pixel-peeping to review results of the A.I. I look at some pros and cons of mathematical versus A.I. interpolation is doing behind the scenes. In this video, I do a quick and simple explanation of interpolation and go into what the A.I. Questions like "Have you reviewed it?" "How does it compare to Qimage's interpolation or other math based resampling?" "If it's that good, should I just use it on ALL my photos prior to printing with Qimage?" Or even, "I'm trying it but it's taking 30 minutes to resample one photo". So naturally, I'm getting questions from Qimage users. Gigapixel interpolation tool and reviews are popping up everywhere. Lots of people are talking about the new A.I.
0 kommentar(er)
