Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: QImage Questions  (Read 7292 times)

BruceHouston

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 308
QImage Questions
« on: June 22, 2008, 06:13:10 am »

Hi,

The QImage website makes claims of better uprezzing results than are available with Photoshop.  However, the comparisons are to Photoshop V6, which of course is ancient history, prior to the "smoother" and "sharper" versions of bicubic.  Are there any image quality reasons for a CS3 user to use QImage (with an Epson 2400 or 3800), or is QImage's main claim to fame these days that it automates print layout?

Could anyone who has used QImage Studio version please comment on the value of Studio over Professional?  The QImage website comparison chart suggests that Studio is faster and has smoother interpolation than Professional.  Has this been your experience?

(I would probably never use the print-from-raw capability which exists only in Studio as I use Lightroom.  So, if Studio is neither faster nor results in higher-quality images, I will probably choose Professional.)

Many thanks!
Bruce
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
QImage Questions
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2008, 08:14:38 am »

Hi Bruce,

I own Qimage Studio and bought it for:
- dual core support (it is faster)
- hybrid SE interpolation (I've not done any comparisons to the other interpolations though)
- the ability to define up to 100 print sizes (that was the biggest reason for me)

Honestly, I was quite happy with the interpolation before the Hybrid SE version became available.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Nill Toulme

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 738
    • http://www.toulmephoto.com
QImage Questions
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2008, 09:15:26 am »

I agree with what Ron said about the Studio version.  Me too.

As for this question:
Quote
...Are there any image quality reasons for a CS3 user to use QImage (with an Epson 2400 or 3800), or is QImage's main claim to fame these days that it automates print layout?...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202808\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In addition to and above its excellent print layout facility, I would rank as the program's primary benefit its superb upsizing and print sharpening capabilities.  Unlike CS3 or any other printing program of which I'm aware, there's absolutely no need whatsoever to resize and sharpen your image for print.  Qimage does this more easily, more quickly and just plain better than any other method I know of.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
QImage Questions
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2008, 10:00:18 am »

Quote
Hi,

The QImage website makes claims of better uprezzing results than are available with Photoshop.  However, the comparisons are to Photoshop V6, which of course is ancient history, prior to the "smoother" and "sharper" versions of bicubic.  Are there any image quality reasons for a CS3 user to use QImage (with an Epson 2400 or 3800), or is QImage's main claim to fame these days that it automates print layout?

Could anyone who has used QImage Studio version please comment on the value of Studio over Professional?  The QImage website comparison chart suggests that Studio is faster and has smoother interpolation than Professional.  Has this been your experience?

(I would probably never use the print-from-raw capability which exists only in Studio as I use Lightroom.  So, if Studio is neither faster nor results in higher-quality images, I will probably choose Professional.)

Many thanks!
Bruce
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The competition in extrapolation algorithms will continue and Qimage will be among the best, like it was in the past. Qimage gives you choices of extrapolation methods and the degree of extrapolation is selectable. Next to the mentioned intelligent print sharpening there's the anti-aliasing in downsampling that isn't so common in other applications and printer drivers. The main thing is that Qimage does it all on the fly, your archived file isn't changed for the job today while the output data is adapted to every size you print now or next year. There's the log where you can find the settings of an old job and reactivate them or use the data to write the invoice. There's the print filter that can do another on the fly action for the print like I have made one to shift the whites a tiny bit so the Z3100 gloss enhancer will print on the whites in the image in economy mode. There's the possibility to give each image on the print page it's own ICC printer profile or rendering choice in printing. The border additions. Etc, Etc,

Get the demo and accept the User Interface as it is and then you will see that it is much more than the up- and downsampling. The evolution of the program will not stop and an active Qimage mailing list is one reason for it.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged

Paul Sumi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1217
QImage Questions
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2008, 10:14:20 am »

Bruce,

I've been a QImage user for the past 4 or 5 years and recently upgraded from the Professional to the Studio version.  Not only for the reasons already mentioned but also because I wanted to show my appreciation to Mike Chaney, the author of the program.  He releases a major upgrade every year with countless bug fixes and minor updates - with lifetime free upgrades.

If you decide to go the Professional route, you can always upgrade to the Studio version later.  The cost to upgrade is the difference in price between the two versions.

http://www.ddisoftware.com/forms/trade.html

Best,

Paul
Logged

walter.sk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1433
QImage Questions
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2008, 11:00:31 am »

I agree with everything said so far.  I've been printing from Qimage for years now.  I use the Pro version, and love the combination of the hybrid interpolation and smart sharpening.  I make prints up to 24x36" and get comments all the time from other photographers on the image quality.  I've done some comparisons between resizing in CS3 using Bicubic Smoother, Bicubic Sharper, and garden variety Bicubic, with output sharpening with the very fine PhotoKit Sharpen, compared to resizing on the fly with Hybrid and Smart Sharpen in Qimage.  My impression is that visually, the Qimage prints range from as good as CS3 to smoother with fewer noticeable artifacts (and then, only with a loupe) than CS3.  

But when you take into account that the enlarging and sharpening is done on the fly, with its savings in time, effort and hard drive space, Qimage is my winner.

Additionally, I soft-proof in CS3, adding adjustment layers when necessary.  Qimage has  softproof/original A-B capability that is as accurate as CS3's, and it reads the adjustment layers.
Logged

abiggs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 555
    • http://www.andybiggs.com
QImage Questions
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2008, 12:47:21 pm »

I really do wish we had a Mac version of Qimage.

Logged
Andy Biggs
[url=http://www.andybiggs.com

Scott Martin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1315
    • Onsight
QImage Questions
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2008, 02:16:08 pm »

Quote
I really do wish we had a Mac version of Qimage. [{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
ImageNest is getting better and better with each update. They will be announcing version 1.1 tomorrow which adds PDF, EPS and PS format support, an improved "best fit" nesting algorithm, roll length optimization, and (finally) step and repeat. My favorite new feature (in part because it was my suggestion) is the "bottom weight" button which automatically figures out proper bottom weighting for your images. [a href=\"http://www.bluecubit.com]http://www.bluecubit.com[/url]
Logged
Scott Martin
www.on-sight.com

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
QImage Questions
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2008, 03:29:17 pm »

Quote
I really do wish we had a Mac version of Qimage.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202857\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lightroom V2 beta has some new print features that look nice.  If they keep working on it I suspect that in a year or two they may compete with Qimage.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
QImage Questions
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2008, 07:29:38 pm »

Quote
I really do wish we had a Mac version of Qimage.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202857\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
To those of us heavily invested in PC hardware, it is gratifying to know that there is one application that is better on PC than on Mac.  
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Paul Sumi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1217
QImage Questions
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2008, 07:38:33 pm »

Quote
I really do wish we had a Mac version of Qimage.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202857\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I understand that QImage works on Intel Macs using virtualization software like Parallels.

Paul
Logged

Edhopkins

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
QImage Questions
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2008, 07:46:56 pm »

Quote
To those of us heavily invested in PC hardware, it is gratifying to know that there is one application that is better on PC than on Mac.   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202920\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The new Macs can run PC software!!  I plan to get a new MacPro and a copy of Vista or something and run Qimage on my Mac.  (I will probably use "parallels", a program that allows you have both operating systems running at the same time.  With "bootcamp" you have to reboot to get into the other environment.  I will have this PC environment on my MAC solely to run Qimage on it.  (I have an HP Z3100ps GP)

All Mac users CAN use Qimage!!! (Provided they have fast enough hardware and have upgraded to Leopard. I am still waiting to upgrade to Leopard because of issues with the APS (advanced profiling System.)

Ed Hopkins

Baltimore, MD
Logged

abiggs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 555
    • http://www.andybiggs.com
QImage Questions
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2008, 08:25:14 pm »

Quote
I understand that QImage works on Intel Macs using virtualization software like Parallels.

Paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202922\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's not the same. Running Windows on a Mac is like putting a Yugo engine in a Ferrari.

:-)

But seriously, I don't ever want to run code that has anything to do with Windows. When I quit the corporate world, I left behind all of the things that were necessary for the corporate world. Now I make decisions based on my own requirements, and having to deal with silly OS issues in Windows is one of those things I can now avoid. Like having to reinstall Windows every 12 months just to have a well running environment.
Logged
Andy Biggs
[url=http://www.andybiggs.com

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
QImage Questions
« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2008, 03:58:57 am »

Quote
The new Macs can run PC software!!  I plan to get a new MacPro and a copy of Vista or something and run Qimage on my Mac.  (I will probably use "parallels", a program that allows you have both operating systems running at the same time.  With "bootcamp" you have to reboot to get into the other environment.  I will have this PC environment on my MAC solely to run Qimage on it.  (I have an HP Z3100ps GP)

All Mac users CAN use Qimage!!! (Provided they have fast enough hardware and have upgraded to Leopard. I am still waiting to upgrade to Leopard because of issues with the APS (advanced profiling System.)

Ed Hopkins

Baltimore, MD
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It is probably cheaper and more effective to have a hooked up secondhand PC running Qimage and send the image files one way to it. Frees the MAC from printing too. For some it could also be a real world experience to measure up the tales about Windows that circle in the Mac world. I'm a bystander, if Risc Os wasn't copied and killed by both Windows and Apple OSses I would still use that UK born OS.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8961
    • site
QImage Questions
« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2008, 05:57:15 pm »

Quote
ImageNest is getting better and better with each update. They will be announcing version 1.1 tomorrow which adds PDF, EPS and PS format support, an improved "best fit" nesting algorithm, roll length optimization, and (finally) step and repeat. My favorite new feature (in part because it was my suggestion) is the "bottom weight" button which automatically figures out proper bottom weighting for your images. http://www.bluecubit.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I find their pricing scheme somewhat distasteful, though. Given that the software has exactly the same features, I really don't see any justification for charging extra (more than 500% extra!) for the ability to handle wider papers.

Other than soak the rich, of course, which seems to me based on a mistaken assumption, illogical and of dubious morality.

Jeremy
Logged

peteh

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 200
    • http://
QImage Questions
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2008, 06:48:39 pm »

Quote
It's not the same. Running Windows on a Mac is like putting a Yugo engine in a Ferrari.

:-)

But seriously, I don't ever want to run code that has anything to do with Windows. When I quit the corporate world, I left behind all of the things that were necessary for the corporate world. Now I make decisions based on my own requirements, and having to deal with silly OS issues in Windows is one of those things I can now avoid. Like having to reinstall Windows every 12 months just to have a well running environment.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202926\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
NOT TRUE ,you should see XP Pro run under bootcamp on Leopard 10.5.3.It's way faster than any PC, I've seen or built.
Logged

BruceHouston

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 308
QImage Questions
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2008, 07:18:42 pm »

Wow; thanks all!

I am going to order my QImage Studio license right this minute; because with all of that praise I expect the price to double!  

Regards,
Bruce
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up