I know that you can put a image in photoshopawith 72dpi and turn it to 300dpi. It not the same as if the image started out as a 300dpi. Now I learn of Genuine Fractals. then I learn you can reander a image in bryce to get from 72 to 300 dpi. My question is do bryce use the same as Genuine Fractals to make the missing px. ?

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

First of all- is Bryce a bitmap or a vector program? (I'm not familiar at all with Bryce) That can make a HUGE difference. Vector images are based on arithmetic calculations & can be blown up with no noise or pixelation. While a bitmap image uses pixels- the larger you make that image- the larger you make the pixels. Some programs work well when you enlarge the image with the pixels- but a vector image (which is never a photo) wouldnt need it.

I do not know but I going to the bryce forum and ask them someone may know. I did blow up two images I did in bryce. When I render in bryce it will save at 72dpi and what ever size up put it on; oh it saves it in bitmap. Now this week I learn you can take the image and go to files and click on render to disk you can put the size you wish like 18x24 at 300dpi. the two image I had printed had no noise. It was render at 840x630 at 72dpi then I put it in Digital Image Suite # 9[a photoshop type program] I made a new blank canves then I click and drag the image I wish to get to 300dpi and move the edges to the size I wish then click on ok. It kink of float there so you can move it around and all. This will make it 300dpi with out going to image imlargement.

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

okay- if Bryce saves at a 72dpi- then it must be bitmapped (pixels).
(Ya learn something new every day!) ;-)

Adobe Illustrator and Freehand are examples of vector programs. Bryce is not. this is what I learn and i can reander it to 300 also if i click on files and then click on "render to disk" under files I not sure if you can save it in a tiff or not then I have to see about that

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

I do have two messages in the bryce forum going on this subject right now. they on page 1 up on top for now. they can answer some of your guestion on bryce if you like to look at them. I still do not know if bryce is doing the same as Genuine Fractals is doing

what you see is not what you know; it in your face

Hi everybody! I'vbe been curious about what has been mentionned in this topic as i often need to enlarge my picture, I use Shortcut photozoom, wich as you know, add pixels with an advance arithmetic feature. The result is pretty uch good, but, for sure there is noise added, wich desperate me. So yesterday night, I did this experiment as explained here..and my question is I am stupid or am I having an illusion but I found an interesting thing, that seems to me too simple to be true... I took a 72 dpi 300X400 image on the web with achitecturals details...I open it in psp, duplicate it into a vector layer, than rezize the image to 8X10 inches to 300 dpi...Create a new selection and copy it as a new normal rast...I than I save this as a tiff image...I opened it...and is it a miracle or what..the new bitmap image is having really 8X10,between 3000 and 4000 pixels and 300 dpi..from 100 ko I had 40 megs..the image was very crisp and clear..no noise...I check with few editors and averything was the same... Does it means that I really would have the same quanlity i saw on the screen than to print? How could be explained all this trouble to add pixels if converting into vector and back to bitmap is so easy to enlarge..Do i misse something? Thank's a lot for your comments!