Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] RE: Genuine Fractals ( was Re: Nikon Coolscan)



>answered Laurie's question

A clarification; none of the questions were my questions.  I have only
responded to other's questions. Anthony's question is a legitimate question
in its own right; it just was not the question that was asked and that I was
responding to.  My first reaction was to the fact that in raising his
question he appeared to be putting down the previous question as not being a
legitimate one - a moot one not worthy of asking much less responding to
while his was the important and non-moot legitimate question.

While I cannot, and do not intend to, speak to others' knowledge and
understanding of GF, I think that I have a good grip on what it is about,
how it works in general, what claims are being made for it, and how it is
said to differ from other types of programs.  First, it is a plugin
application and not a stand alone application.  Second, it makes use of
fractal technology methods to render image data into mathematical formula
like expressions from the original bitmapped or raster graphics (somewhat
along the lines of what happens with vector graphics although not exactly).
As an artfact of this rendering, it is able to produce file compression at
one of two levels (loseless and virtually loseless); but this is not the
main purpose or objective of the application.  It main objectve is to create
an encoded (read mathematicaly rendered) source file which is resolution
independent and can be opened at any size or resolution on varying occasions
so as to render or reconstitute the raster image at the needed size and
resolution.

The claimed benefits are that  (1) one does not have to save a set of files
at different image sizes and resolutions to meet one's actual and potential
future needs and (2) one does not need to worry about generating artifacts
as  a result of resizing and resampling the same source file multiple
different times and ways as is the case with traditional resizing and
resampling methods.  The limitations to date are that the plugin only
handles 24 bit images, requires one not to sharpen the image with USM prior
to saving it as a .stn (GF) file leaving all such sharpening until the file
is reopened for outputting to a particular output device for use otherwise
artfacts will be produced, and the encoding decoding process is very slow.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Clark Guy
> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 12:09 PM
> To: laurie@advancenet.net
> Subject: [filmscanners] Genuine Fractals ( was Re: Nikon Coolscan)
>
>
> HI, everybody!
>
> This discussion has gotten so murky that it's hard to tell if
> anyone has
> answered Laurie's question, or if many here know what GF
> actually is...
>
> GF came with my Minolta Scan Multi II almost two years ago... (tempus
> fugit!)  It's purpose is that of a flexible image sizing program.  It
> compresses images (which in Medium Format can get huge) by an
> algorithm
> significantly different (better, I think) than either that of JPEG or
> Lempel-Zev, and by using some of the same math, it can
> upsample in a manner
> different (maybe better) than the standard ones available in
> Photshop, for
> example.
>
> Thus, it's utility is for making compressed images that
> uncompress in a
> manner more pleasant (a matter of taste, of course) than
> those done by the
> "traditional" methods.   It can also upsample to produce very
> large images,
> using techniques that, at least to the eye, mimic real detail.
>
> Anyway, I have the version that came with my scanner, and
> have used it a
> little bit.  For my present useage, JPEG and TIFF with compression are
> adequate (if Viewscan was able to hook to my GF program like a plug-in
> would, then I'd probably use it instead of TIFF when I save
> my scans).   My
> version, while appearing to be a full version (not image size
> limited as are
> some versions) is unable to deal with 48 bit color, so that is a
> limitation.. perhaps this has been addressed in more recent versions.
>
> This I believe is the utility of having GF when using a
> scanner that is
> capable of outputing rather large images, as I believe a
> Nikon Coolscan (or
> Polaroid SS120, or Scan Multi Pro...) are.
>
> I hope this serves to cool off some of the acrimony I"m seeing here!
>
> Guy Clark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:anthony@atkielski.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 6:26 PM
> To: Clark Guy
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon Coolscan
>
>
> If you have a Nikon Coolscan, why would you need Genuine
> Fractals at all?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Laurie Solomon" <laurie@advancenet.net>
> To: <anthony@atkielski.com>
> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 20:00
> Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Nikon Coolscan
>
>
> After checking the Lizardtech web site (after posting my
> message to you of
> course), I find it made me out to be a lier of sorts.  There
> is a Genuine
> Fractal Light 2.0 which is an RGB only and will handle files
> of a restricted
> size limit which they are selling.  Previously, this edition was only
> bundled with some peripherals and not for sale.  Then they
> started pushing
> the higher priced PrintPro Edition, once LizardTech bought
> the product from
> Altamira, and stopped bundling the Light Edition, replaceing
> it with the
> standard edition and a coupon like you mentioned.  If this is
> you case, then
> both the GF 2.5 and the GF PrintPro are full versions of
> their respective
> editions (the key limitation being that the former is RGB
> capable only while
> the PrintPro is also CYMK  and CIE-Lab capable). Personally,
> unless one is a
> prepress professional or someone who sends files to such
> people, I see no
> need for CYMK and CIE-Lab capability  or reason for the extra
> expense of
> PrintPro.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with
> 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the
> message title or body
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.