Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/06/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It seems to work very well in two areas. 1. It holds the quality of a picture for very big enlargements. I have done 16X20's off of 35mm that look excellent. 2. It RADICALLY reduces amount of your hard drive dedicated to storing photos. You only store the image in it's ORIGINAL size, so for my 2 1/4x 2 1/4 shot that wound up being about 38MG at 2400DPI. When you want to blow the shot up, you do it by opening the 38MG file and blowing it up in Photoshop, but from a GF (.stn) file. Saving a TIFF file at this size would be probably over 100MG. A similar file that I blew up to 14X14 inches came in as almost 900MG! - --- Matthew Powell <mlpowell@directvinternet.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, June 12, 2002, at 04:12 PM, Darrell > Jennings wrote: > > Tim, I installed GF from the web with no problem > > today. It put itelf into the "Photoshop only" > Plugin > > folder and I (figuring it knew better than I did) > > allowed it to do so...no crash on loading it up. > DJ > > How much of a benefit is GF? I'm using a CanoScan > FS2710 - and figure > it's good for up to 8x10. Would GF let me go 11x14 > or higher without a > significant loss in quality? > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html