Genuine Fractals in Photoshop; Where?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, May 22, 2005.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I had no problem putting an Olympus raw file
    plugin into Photoshop, it works. But I'm wondering where
    Genuine Fractals ends up showing up? It's
    installed according to directions but how
    do you "call it up?"
    RichA, May 22, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. You save a file in their proprietary format, and then upon opening it
    you have to decide on the size you need. FWIW, there seems to be a
    compatibility issue with CS2
    ( for the
    time being.

    Bart van der Wolf, May 22, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Bubbabob Guest

    You have to do a 'Save As' into their proprietary .stn format and then
    reopen it in order to resize. It's a real pain in the butt and their
    interface is one of the worst I've used.
    Bubbabob, May 22, 2005
  4. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Not sure, but I would expect when resizing an image you can select it as
    opposed to bicubic, linear or whatever in the resize dialog opposite the
    "Resample Image" checkbox. If not that, then in the Filters.

    Alan Browne, May 22, 2005
  5. RichA

    John Bean Guest

    You expected wrong, Alan.
    Nope, any more guesses? What's the point in answering a
    question if you have no idea what the answer actually is -
    especially when it's already been answered correctly by
    John Bean, May 22, 2005
  6. RichA

    Frank ess Guest

    Some of my plugins show up in "Automate".

    What's the point of discounting honest attempts at resolving
    Frank ess, May 22, 2005
  7. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    I didn't peek a the other replies. However, the two ways I mentioned
    (as expectations), esp. the first, would be good ways to do it, so
    reasonable suggestions to try.

    Those are the ways that would fit the PS paradigm in a user useful and
    friendly way. Color me naive for expecting G.F. to do something the
    right way.

    The other replies seem to indicate that the interface is rather kludgy
    and inconvenient.

    Alan Browne, May 22, 2005
  8. RichA

    John Bean Guest

    I understand that Alan, and after re-reading my reply it
    sounds more critical than I intended. But it's often useful
    to read existing replies before replying :)
    I'd the OP had already looked in all the obvious places. But
    maybe not.
    Oh yes, that's an understatement. And current versions of PS
    can do just as good a job of upsizing without its help, IMO.
    I tried a trial version a little while back, couldn't live
    with it.
    John Bean, May 22, 2005
  9. RichA

    Bubbabob Guest

    Nope. Not that easy or logical.
    Bubbabob, May 22, 2005
  10. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Thanks to all. Somehow, I've screwed the installation and will have
    to try again.
    RichA, May 23, 2005
  11. RichA

    Stacey Guest

    Or maybe actually understand what geniune fractals even does in the first
    place before trying to answer?
    Yea being able to save ONE file and then create any size file you need from
    it later is so inconvenient..
    Stacey, May 23, 2005
  12. ---------------------------

    Well if any of you had a clue in the first place it might be different. The
    "others" haven't got a ghost of a clue either.
    The stn format isn't used in the current version. All this bullshit you are
    offering is history. Gone. Never to be used again.

    No friends... The thing is under 'Automation' . So that makes seven bored
    losers with nothing better to do than answer questions with the wrong
    answers... God I love this group!. None of you even comprehend the concept
    of enlarging digital images, much less have a clue about doing it.

    [email protected], May 23, 2005
  13. SNIP
    That's only valid for version 4.x, which allows to scale the active
    image in Photoshop, without the need to create an STN first ().
    Prior versions only operate by saving an STN file and scale when

    Bart van der Wolf, May 23, 2005
  14. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Why not? Resize is what GF is all about. The various existing algos
    (bicubic, linear, etc.) are applied to the resize function in PS. Where
    GF is used for resize, that would be the natural place to invoke it.
    Alan Browne, May 23, 2005
  15. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    [email protected] wrote:

    Feeling better now Dougie? The issue wasn't about enlargement
    (directly), but about how it is integrated into PS. And the answer
    appears to be: "very badly".

    Alan Browne, May 23, 2005
  16. RichA

    Bubbabob Guest

    Reread my post. I was agreeing with you, not disagreeing. Yes, that would
    be the natural place for it. No, that's not where they put it.
    Bubbabob, May 23, 2005
  17. RichA

    Bubbabob Guest

    What a putz. It's the bozo bin for you, Dougie. Plonk.
    Bubbabob, May 23, 2005
  18. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    "Nope. Not that easy or logical." does not sound like agreement.

    Please have the last word, this thread is dead for me.

    Alan Browne, May 23, 2005
  19. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    No!! keep him out of the killfile. You'll see the humor after another
    dozen posts or so...

    Alan Browne, May 23, 2005
  20. RichA

    Douglas Guest

    Very few people answering this thread have a clue about anything to do
    with enlarging software that actually works, When it intergrates
    seamlessly with Photoshop, it must be all that more confusing for the poor
    dears. Frankly Bart, I'd have thought you of all people would keep your
    mount shut until you got it right.

    Early(like pre 4.0) versions of GF are indeed klunky to use. They are
    also really good at what they do but it seems the concept of storing a
    small file and printing it at whatever size is required later, escapes all
    but a lone Olympus Evolt owner and myself.

    Version 4.09 and later provide a Photoshop (CS included) interface
    which is started under automation and opens it's own window where the
    options are so complex, I doubt anyone but a rank novice would see the
    benefit of being able to choose the resolution and size while you see
    a screen representation of the results, then continue back to Photoshop
    which will process them. Nahhh. Way too simple for Brownie, this one.

    Such an interface is so basic that the nerds and geeks who inhabit this
    group would no doubt pass it by, claiming it didn't give them enough
    "control" over the process. Oddly the control earlier versions gave
    them was considered too klunky... Hmmm. Does that say anything
    about the geeks?

    Perhaps the overiding reason these wankers don't have the
    software is because they would actually have to buy it! God... What a
    concept, actually pay for something instead of put up with the free
    stuff's antique, sub standard results.

    Douglas, May 24, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.