: Snake Oil ! hahahahaha! it's softening, adding stuff and giving an overall impression that the pic looks OK bigger, is all :) Upsizing is a pretty acceptable practice these days, even amoung those who know the image isn't being 'upsized' however, the method used probably parallels optical enlarging to a degree - use a poor quality lens or the wrong aperture and the image softens and degrades more than it should. Shift the focus somewhat and tones are being laid where they didn't exist on the negative/film as the image blurs slightly.. I guess if I only had a 35mm neg and I wnated to knock out a sharp (ish) billboard size image I'd copy up progressively, building unsharp masks as I went to overcome the blurry bits and by the end of the long exercise, I'd probably have something rather horrible which would look OK from 50 feet back - and didn't look like chunks of coloured stones piled together . I always *loved* reducing 5x4's though ..just for fun :-) k : In "upsizing" an image, one : >should leave the "resample image" on (bicubic smoother, say), but : >increase the size by no more than 10 percent at a time, applying that : >formula repeatedly until the desired size is reached. : :
