From: Digest To: "OS/2GenAu Digest" Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 00:01:10 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 915 Reply-To: X-List-Unsubscribe: www.os2site.com/list/ ************************************************** Saturday 14 August 2004 Number 915 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Expanding graphics : Ed Durrant 2 Re: Expanding graphics : Ed Durrant 3 Re: Expanding graphics : Mike O'Connor 4 Re: Expanding graphics : John Angelico" 5 Re: Expanding graphics : Mike O'Connor 6 Re: Expanding graphics : brianb at kdfisher dot com dot au 7 Re: Expanding graphics : Kris Steenhaut 8 Re: Expanding graphics : Kris Steenhaut 9 Re: Expanding graphics : Dennis Nolan 10 Re: Expanding graphics : Ed Durrant 11 Re: Expanding graphics : Ed Durrant 12 Re: Expanding graphics : Mike O'Connor 13 Re: Expanding graphics : Kris Steenhaut 14 Re: Ecomstation 1.2 : David Shearer" 15 Re: Expanding graphics : Kris Steenhaut **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:16:02 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Expanding graphics Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different graphic type before "stretchin" it ? I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to A3 size. Any ideas or suggestions ?? Cheers/2 Ed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:25:55 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Re: Expanding graphics That should have said WITHOUT not WITH Pixelisation ! Ed Durrant wrote: > Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics > program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with > pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different > graphic type before "stretchin" it ? > > I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to > A3 size. > > Any ideas or suggestions ?? > > Cheers/2 > > Ed. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:39:34 +1000 From: Mike O'Connor Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Ed Durrant wrote: >Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics >program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with >pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different >graphic type before "stretchin" it ? > >I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to >A3 size. > >Any ideas or suggestions ?? > >Cheers/2 > >Ed. > > Hi Ed, To be able to do that successfully, without pixelization, you'd need to have scanned the original small image at about 4000x4000 resolution, and saved it in a lossless format. Unless you use a vector-oriented program like [the former] Micrografx Designer [32,000 layers] and "hand-paint" the blown-up image. If the image is high enough resolution to "trace" successfully, you can then zoom it successfully. I still run it under WINOS2 [Designer 3D-Technical Edition 4.1x] HTH -- Regards, Mike Failed the exam for -------------------- MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert -------------------- [ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments] [Please use zipped versions of above] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:46:19 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Expanding graphics On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:25:55 +1000, Ed Durrant wrote: To my untrained ear, that sounds like the graphics equivalent of scaling up a font from footnote to Banner Headline size... Does that require a vector format rather than a bitmapped format? Ed, do you have any of the usual suspects? Embellish, PMView Pro, PMJpeg ? Have you tried any of them? Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG talldad at kepl dot com dot au ________________________ >That should have said WITHOUT not WITH Pixelisation ! > >Ed Durrant wrote: > >> Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics >> program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with >> pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different >> graphic type before "stretchin" it ? >> >> I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to >> A3 size. >> >> Any ideas or suggestions ?? >> >> Cheers/2 >> >> Ed. >> > >> > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:50:53 +1000 From: Mike O'Connor Subject: Re: Expanding graphics John Angelico wrote: >On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:25:55 +1000, Ed Durrant wrote: > >To my untrained ear, that sounds like the graphics equivalent of scaling up a >font from footnote to Banner Headline size... > >Does that require a vector format rather than a bitmapped format? > >Ed, do you have any of the usual suspects? Embellish, PMView Pro, PMJpeg ? >Have you tried any of them? > >Best regards >John Angelico >OS/2 SIG >talldad at kepl dot com dot au >________________________ > > > >>That should have said WITHOUT not WITH Pixelisation ! >> >>Ed Durrant wrote: >> >>>Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics >>>program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with >>>pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different >>>graphic type before "stretchin" it ? >>> >>>I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to >>>A3 size. >>> >>>Any ideas or suggestions ?? >>> >>>Cheers/2 >>> Hi John, Yes has to be vector not raster! -- Regards, Mike Failed the exam for -------------------- MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert -------------------- [ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments] [Please use zipped versions of above] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:39:24 +1030 From: brianb at kdfisher dot com dot au Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Ed, If its a bitmap format you will need to vectorise it. If you have access to corel draw 9 on a wnidows machine that will do the conversion. I don't know of an OS/2 solution. ----------------------------------------- Brian Butler System Administrator brianb at kdfisher dot com dot au Ed Durrant cc: Subject: Re: Expanding graphics 14/08/2004 15:55 Please respond to os2genau That should have said WITHOUT not WITH Pixelisation ! Ed Durrant wrote: > Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics > program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with > pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different > graphic type before "stretchin" it ? > > I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to > A3 size. > > Any ideas or suggestions ?? > > Cheers/2 > > Ed. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 09:55:44 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Ed Durrant schreef: >I'm talking about a large expansion > Size of graphics are set by resolution, > - from Icon like size to >A3 size. > > > That would give an most unpleasent result I'm afraid (supposed the icon has the size (=resolution) of an icon indeed. The opposite is quite do-able of course. >Any ideas or suggestions ?? > > > > Read the chapter about Thumbnails in the PMview manual. -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:00:12 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Mike O'Connor schreef: > To be able to do that successfully, without pixelization, you'd need > to have scanned the original small image at about 4000x4000 > resolution, and saved it in a lossless format. > Indeed. > Unless you use a vector-oriented program like [the former] Micrografx > Designer [32,000 layers] and "hand-paint" the blown-up image. And unless you have a scanner which scans at real 4000*4000 resolution. With PMview you can alter resolution to 4000x4000 too. But that is with pixellisation of course. Not a good idea anyway. -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:32:23 +1000 From: Dennis Nolan Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Kris Steenhaut wrote: > > > Mike O'Connor schreef: > >> To be able to do that successfully, without pixelization, you'd need >> to have scanned the original small image at about 4000x4000 >> resolution, and saved it in a lossless format. >> > Indeed. > >> Unless you use a vector-oriented program like [the former] Micrografx >> Designer [32,000 layers] and "hand-paint" the blown-up image. > > > And unless you have a scanner which scans at real 4000*4000 resolution. > > With PMview you can alter resolution to 4000x4000 too. But that is > with pixellisation of course. Not a good idea anyway. > Strangly PMView Pro does a reasonable job of enlarging icons, unfortunately they look very fuzzy and out of focus. It looks like they do an expand and blur operation, may even do it incremently. But there is not pixelation as we know it. Regards Dennis. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:46:56 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Re: Expanding graphics I have tried PMView 2000 without success - it pixelates. Cheers/2 Ed. John Angelico wrote: > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:25:55 +1000, Ed Durrant wrote: > > To my untrained ear, that sounds like the graphics equivalent of scaling up a > font from footnote to Banner Headline size... > > Does that require a vector format rather than a bitmapped format? > > Ed, do you have any of the usual suspects? Embellish, PMView Pro, PMJpeg ? > Have you tried any of them? > > Best regards > John Angelico > OS/2 SIG > talldad at kepl dot com dot au > ________________________ > > >That should have said WITHOUT not WITH Pixelisation ! > > > >Ed Durrant wrote: > > > >> Can anyone suggest a (preferably OS/2 based) graphics > >> program that is capable of expanding a small graphic with > >> pixelisation ? Perhaps I just need to convert to a different > >> graphic type before "stretchin" it ? > >> > >> I'm talking about a large expansion - from Icon like size to > >> A3 size. > >> > >> Any ideas or suggestions ?? > >> > >> Cheers/2 > >> > >> Ed. > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:53:59 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Re: Expanding graphics brianb at kdfisher dot com dot au wrote: > Ed, > If its a bitmap format you will need to vectorise it. > If you have access to corel draw 9 on a wnidows machine > that will do the conversion. > I don't know of an OS/2 solution. > > ----------------------------------------- Can you give me the extention / format name of a vectorised graphics format ?? Then I can see what I can find to vectorise the graphic. Cheers/2 Ed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 20:05:12 +1000 From: Mike O'Connor Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Kris Steenhaut wrote: > Mike O'Connor schreef: > >> To be able to do that successfully, without pixelization, you'd need >> to have scanned the original small image at about 4000x4000 >> resolution, and saved it in a lossless format. > > Indeed. > >> Unless you use a vector-oriented program like [the former] Micrografx >> Designer [32,000 layers] and "hand-paint" the blown-up image. > Also works down to micron resolution - but as Corel bought them out - maybe Corel has the same feature nowadays - haven't used it since about V5/6 - it was previously visibly inferior IMO because MGX used integer math, whereas Corel used the inferior floating-point math. > And unless you have a scanner which scans at real 4000*4000 resolution. > > With PMview you can alter resolution to 4000x4000 too. But that is > with pixellisation of course. Not a good idea anyway. Hi Kris, I wasn't talking about 4000 pixels x 4000 pixels - but about 4000 dpi >> 16M per sq.inch! ;-) -- Regards, Mike Failed the exam for -------------------- MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert -------------------- [ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments] [Please use zipped versions of above] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:05:56 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Dennis Nolan schreef: > Kris Steenhaut wrote: > >> >> >> Mike O'Connor schreef: >> >>> To be able to do that successfully, without pixelization, you'd need >>> to have scanned the original small image at about 4000x4000 >>> resolution, and saved it in a lossless format. >>> >> Indeed. >> >>> Unless you use a vector-oriented program like [the former] >>> Micrografx Designer [32,000 layers] and "hand-paint" the blown-up >>> image. >> >> >> >> And unless you have a scanner which scans at real 4000*4000 resolution. >> >> With PMview you can alter resolution to 4000x4000 too. But that is >> with pixellisation of course. Not a good idea anyway. >> > Strangly PMView Pro does a reasonable job of enlarging icons, I am a PMview supporter (and translator) you know. PMview does an excellent job on enlarging. That is, it goes further, it does more than most alike programs with less loss of quality. But it can't go byond the bounderies of physics of course. > unfortunately they look very fuzzy and out of focus. It looks like > they do an expand and blur operation, may even do it incremently. To expand an icon sized image to A3 (that is about twice the "letter" format) without hardware intermediance is a job to hard to do I'm afraid. Mike made the proper suggestion: scan the image at 4000x4000 at least. An on paper an inch sized coloured image scanned at 2400x2400 is already 22,8 MB on disk, so at 4000x4000 we have over 45 MB. Impos/2 doesn't go byond 2400x2400 dpi, Tame/2 doesn't go byond 1600x1600. So it is not an easy job. And remember, scanners boasting about 4800 dpi etc... in reality only do 600x600 in black and white, and even less in colours. > But there is not pixelation as we know it. > > Regards > > Dennis. > > > > > -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 14 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:09:23 +1000 From: "David Shearer" Subject: Re: Ecomstation 1.2 Now that it has been formally announced it is probably a good idea to have a serious think about whether to upgrade. I am a bit confused by the subscription issue - if you don't get this does this mean you won't get free fixes with 1.2 as delivered now via ecsmt? I can understand it also applies to enhancements. The reference to enhanced multimedia etc are vague - what does that mean? A complete overhaul? It seems to me that the 1.2 is simply a manufacturer's refresh. But I could be naive or wrong. Don't get me wrong I am a strong supporter and would upgrade just to support ecs's future - but equally we need adequate info in order to make that decision. Obviously it is early days and maybe I should wait for the first major review by someone who has installed it etc. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 15 ==========================** Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:12:08 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Expanding graphics Mike O'Connor schreef: > > > Hi Kris, > I wasn't talking about 4000 pixels x 4000 pixels - but about 4000 dpi > >> 16M per sq.inch! ;-) > Indeed. I stand corrected. -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------