Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Are there app that can make low res photos larger without losing resolution?

H

hajime

macrumors 604
Original poster
Jul 23, 2007
7,949
1,315
Hi, I know it may be difficult to achieve as the original photos are low resolution or small size.

I got some photos off the internet. When I printed them at larger scale, the images became fuzzy and unclear. They are not so bad but I would prefer clearer images. Are there good programs that allow us to print a larger version of low res photos at least at the same resolution or better, at higher resolution?

I don't have Photoshop but I have Affinity Photo.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Unsupported
First of all, are the images you "got off the internet" images that you shot and have the ownership rights to? Doesn't sound like it. If not, then why are you planning to use them for some purpose which you may or may not be planning to reveal and discuss with the actual photographer? What exactly ARE you intending to do with these images? That is something which photographers take seriously, how their work is being used. Image ownership and copyright is a very important element in photography, and, really, before you go any further in attempting to produce "clearer images" of someone else's work, you need to discuss the situation with them and get their permission before violating their copyright. They very well may have a higher-resolution image that they would be willing to share with you -- for a price. If you are not willing to pay that price, but just go ahead and attempt to use the image anyway, then that's blatant theft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark, T'hain Esh Kelch, Unsupported and 1 other person
hajime said:
Hi, I know it may be difficult to achieve as the original photos are low resolution or small size.

I got some photos off the internet. When I printed them at larger scale, the images became fuzzy and unclear. They are not so bad but I would prefer clearer images. Are there good programs that allow us to print a larger version of low res photos at least at the same resolution or better, at higher resolution?

I don't have Photoshop but I have Affinity Photo.
Click to expand...

Not really. Have Adobe stuff, LR and a couple of others but enlarging without loss is generally a miss. I have had best results with photoshop.
That said, I have taken some smaller shots and printed them as hq photos at size. Have a great scanner that allows me to scan enlarged. Doesn’t always work. I have a lot of older photos from my parents childhood I work on occasionally. I is very dependent on photos vs digital prints.
 
Clix Pix said:
First of all, are the images you "got off the internet" images that you shot and have the ownership rights to? Doesn't sound like it. If not, then why are you planning to use them for some purpose which you may or may not be planning to reveal and discuss with the actual photographer? What exactly ARE you intending to do with these images? That is something which photographers take seriously, how their work is being used. Image ownership and copyright is a very important element in photography, and, really, before you go any further in attempting to produce "clearer images" of someone else's work, you need to discuss the situation with them and get their permission before violating their copyright. They very well may have a higher-resolution image that they would be willing to share with you -- for a price. If you are not willing to pay that price, but just go ahead and attempt to use the image anyway, then that's blatant theft.
Click to expand...

I don't really need to explain to you but anyway. Looking at the computer screen is bad for the eyes. I printed it out but it was too small to see clearly. That is why I want to print an enlarged version for my own viewing. Enlarging the images made them more unclear. Am I guilty? Is this a violation of law? If people are not happy about such use, they should not post their images on the internet. They posted images for people to view! There is also no sign about copyright on their page.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Unsupported
hajime said:
Hi, I know it may be difficult to achieve as the original photos are low resolution or small size.

I got some photos off the internet. When I printed them at larger scale, the images became fuzzy and unclear. They are not so bad but I would prefer clearer images. Are there good programs that allow us to print a larger version of low res photos at least at the same resolution or better, at higher resolution?

I don't have Photoshop but I have Affinity Photo.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. It is called Gigapixel AI from Topaz Labs. It is an AI program that takes any small size image or even very low resolution as low as 320x200 and upscale it perfectly to any size you want with low noise and great sharpness. I had taken images taken with my old 2MP digital camera in early 2000s and my old iPhone 3GS, upscaled them and printed them off them with AMAZING results thanks to Gigapixel's AI feature. Gigapixel AI is the by far the best software out there for both Mac and PC. It does require a very beefy Mac with a GPU, which was why I kept my Mac Pro as it has a RX580 GPU in it specifically for AI stuff. If you're not looking for professional upscaling results, then below are websites that you can upload photos to enlarge and pay for what you need.

1. imglarger.com
2. letsenhance.io
3. bigjpg.com
4. deep-image.ai
5. imageupscaler.com
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JJayguy23 and AleRod
hajime said:
I don't really need to explain to you but anyway. Looking at the computer screen is bad for the eyes. I printed it out but it was too small to see clearly. That is why I want to print an enlarged version for my own viewing. Enlarging the images made them more unclear. Am I guilty? Is this a violation of law? If people are not happy about such use, they should not post their images on the internet. They posted images for people to view! There is also no sign about copyright on their page.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a violation of the law and photographers are granted copyright upon creation. They do not need to declare it.

thelawtog.com

Photography Copyright Laws

Topic: CopyrightTime Investment: 8 MinutesSuggested Product: Ultimate Copyright Kit Ahhhh ... thanks to technology life is both easier and more difficult for artists! Photographers are no exception. The words "copyright" are thrown around a lot on photography forums but what does it really...
thelawtog.com
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Jumpthesnark, T'hain Esh Kelch, Unsupported and 3 others
hajime said:
Hi, I know it may be difficult to achieve as the original photos are low resolution or small size.

I got some photos off the internet. When I printed them at larger scale, the images became fuzzy and unclear. They are not so bad but I would prefer clearer images. Are there good programs that allow us to print a larger version of low res photos at least at the same resolution or better, at higher resolution?

I don't have Photoshop but I have Affinity Photo.
Click to expand...
In a word, no. Digital images are made up of pixels. Based on the resolution, there are a fixed number of pixels. Enlarging the image can happen in two ways: enlarge each pixel, or space them out and "make up" (interpolate) pixels to fill the spaces between the images. It's not possible to work with what isn't present in the image.

Enlarging the pixels creates "jaggies" where everything is larger squares of jagged edges - the image will look "blocky".

Interpolation attempts to create new data that bridges from one existing pixel to the next... but at best, it's an educated guess made by the software algorithm... and often "misses" the mark, creating some strange images and/or fuzziness.
 
In the interest of others who might find this thread and have a legitimate reason for such a tool, PhotoZoom Pro is another option: https://www.benvista.com/photozoompro

I've used it with some success on images I've taken, and had the source files for. I do not know how it would do if the source image is a low Rez image from the interwebs.

As to copyrights, mollyc is correct, copyright is conferred upon creation, there is no need to have a "sign" on a page. Publication, even on the internet, does not remove the copyright. Unless explicitly stated, posting an image on the internet does not grant anyone the right to reproduce that image. Quite the reverse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unsupported and Clix Pix
hajime said:
Is this a violation of law? If people are not happy about such use, they should not post their images on the internet. They posted images for people to view! There is also no sign about copyright on their page.
Click to expand...
Depends on your jurisdiction.

  • No, stuff posted on the internet is not free for anybody to use.
  • No, you usually do not have the RIGHT to make a physical COPY of a picture that you didn’t create.
  • No, the original artist does not need to mark the art as copyrighted in order for the law to apply.
Back to your original question: You are trying to interpolate information that isn’t there in the original. So any software approach will "guess". Resize in Photoshop, add blur to make it easier on the eye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark, T'hain Esh Kelch and Unsupported
hajime said:
If people are not happy about such use, they should not post their images on the internet. They posted images for people to view! There is also no sign about copyright on their page.
Click to expand...


thelawtog.com

Photography Copyright Laws

Topic: CopyrightTime Investment: 8 MinutesSuggested Product: Ultimate Copyright Kit Ahhhh ... thanks to technology life is both easier and more difficult for artists! Photographers are no exception. The words "copyright" are thrown around a lot on photography forums but what does it really...
thelawtog.com
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark
hajime said:
I don't really need to explain to you but anyway.
Click to expand...

In that case nobody here needs to explain anything to you!

From a photographer friend's Copyright Notice:

The photographs may not be copied, reproduced, redistributed, manipulated, projected, used or altered in any way without the prior express written permission of the photographer, and payment of a fee or arrangement thereof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark and Clix Pix
Clix Pix said:
First of all, are the images you "got off the internet" images that you shot and have the ownership rights to? Doesn't sound like it. If not, then why are you planning to use them for some purpose which you may or may not be planning to reveal and discuss with the actual photographer? What exactly ARE you intending to do with these images? That is something which photographers take seriously, how their work is being used. Image ownership and copyright is a very important element in photography, and, really, before you go any further in attempting to produce "clearer images" of someone else's work, you need to discuss the situation with them and get their permission before violating their copyright. They very well may have a higher-resolution image that they would be willing to share with you -- for a price. If you are not willing to pay that price, but just go ahead and attempt to use the image anyway, then that's blatant theft.
Click to expand...
I can't say you are wrong, but would it possible to try to be nice about it? Again, I'm not defending him if he is indeed using copyrighted photos.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
darthnebula said:
So public domain photos are actually copyrighted and can't be edited?
Click to expand...

No, Public Domain images where copyrighted but the copyrights have expired. Once the copyright expires the image enters the public domain and can be used by anyone.
 
MevetS said:
No, Public Domain images where copyrighted but the copyrights have expired. Once the copyright expires the image enters the public domain and can be used by anyone.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That is what I thought, but we have some experts here that said otherwise.
 
darthnebula said:
Thank you. That is what I thought, but we have some experts here that said otherwise.
Click to expand...

Photos taken after 1989 are not in the public domain unless specified. Just because it's posted on the internet doesn't make it "public." Those of us who are up in arms about someone trying to upsize a web image are actual photographers, and it doesn't matter if we are hobbyists or professionals. Photos we share are ours and ours alone. They are not free to be downloaded by a random stranger to upsize and print at will.

Public domain photos

How do you know they're public domain photos? Here's how to make sure.
www.publicdomainsherpa.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clix Pix and Unsupported
mollyc said:
Photos taken after 1989 are not in the public domain unless specified. Just because it's posted on the internet doesn't make it "public." Those of us who are up in arms about someone trying to upsize a web image are actual photographers, and it doesn't matter if we are hobbyists or professionals. Photos we share are ours and ours alone. They are not free to be downloaded by a random stranger to upsize and print at will.

Public domain photos

How do you know they're public domain photos? Here's how to make sure.
www.publicdomainsherpa.com
Click to expand...

Photos taken after 1989 would not have had their copyrights expire. So yeah, they would not be in the public domain. Although the copyright holder could allow then to be used as such.

I've not seen anywhere in this thread that states otherwise.

So it is not clear what your point is.
 
mollyc said:
Photos taken after 1989 are not in the public domain unless specified. Just because it's posted on the internet doesn't make it "public." Those of us who are up in arms about someone trying to upsize a web image are actual photographers, and it doesn't matter if we are hobbyists or professionals. Photos we share are ours and ours alone. They are not free to be downloaded by a random stranger to upsize and print at will.

Public domain photos

How do you know they're public domain photos? Here's how to make sure.
www.publicdomainsherpa.com
Click to expand...
I've been a professional photographer for over 25 years, which is why I was drawn to this post. I have had my photos stolen. I understand what you are saying. But that didn't give the original replier the right to accuse the original poster of stealing. It is possible that he was referring to public domain photographs. Maybe he wasn't. Maybe he did steal them. Who knows?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: coolajami, Clix Pix and mollyc
MevetS said:
Photos taken after 1989 would not have had their copyrights expire. So yeah, they would not be in the public domain. Although the copyright holder could allow then to be used as such.

I've not seen anywhere in this thread that states otherwise.

So it is not clear what your point is.
Click to expand...
Read through the posts by darthnebula. Perhaps I misread his tone, and if I did I apologize. 🙂 But he first indicated in a quote that I bolded that he was not certain the photographs were copyrighted. He then countered by asking about public domain photos, which I (perhaps incorrectly) inferred from that he was thinking any photo on the internet is public domain. That is also the attitude from the original poster (who I notice hasn't been back to this thread in some time).

I was merely emphasizing that any modern image found on the internet barring very specific circumstances is already copyrighted and they do not have to be marked as such. My comments were not directed to anything that you wrote. 🙂
 
  • Like
Reactions: MevetS
oh i just realized i actually missed a post by darthnebula. I'm sorry for that! 🙂 Thanks for clarifying you are a professional photographer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darthnebula
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back