Inferior quality with X4 vs. X2?

[paulhubbard]

I've used PSP for years and have loved X2. I finally broke down and upgraded to X4. I've found that X4 seems to degrade the quality of my photos when doing simple resizing. The steps I use are:

Photo taken with a Nikon d3100 at ISO 200, 1/320sec, f10.0, 200mm
1. Open the original jpg - size is 4608x3072
2. Resize to 800x533 - the default resolution is 300 pixels/inch
Results in a nice, smaller jpg.

In X4, however, the Pixel/inch defaults to 72. Change that to 300, and with the same original resized to 800x533, the focus is horrible.

Attached are the results of the resized jpg, first one in X2, second in X4:

photo resized in PSP X2

Photo resized in X4

Why does the quality of the photo degrade so much in X4 when doing nothing more than re-sizing?? This is not acceptable.

[teknisyan]

Similar issue have been posted here as well and I have already reported this to our Engineers and this is currently being investigated.

[paulhubbard]

So considering that Corel is aware of the issue which dramatically degrades the quality of digital photos, completely opposite of what the application is supposed to do, what are my options for getting a refund since I have no use for the new [flawed] version?

[MatsW]

It is relevant what resample method you use. What algorithm do you use, Smart Size, bicubic, bilinear, Pixel Resize, Weighted Average? Could it be that PSPX2 defaults to a different resize algorithm than PSPX4?
/Mats

[flagpole]

at least part of the problem would seem to be that they jpeg compression is lower/higher/worse in the second case. as they have artificially changed it for X4

[Hooterville]

I have the same problem. I wish Corel would hurry up with a patch for this mess. I went back to X3 until they fix the extremely flawed X4.

[LeviFiction]

It's hurrying that caused the problem in the first place don't pressure them. We want good not fast.

[OldRadioGuy]

I have the same problem. I wish Corel would hurry up with a patch for this mess. I went back to X3 until they fix the extremely flawed X4.

If you have downloaded patch #5, you should be getting much faster performance out of X3. That patch seems to have fixed the speed problem and most of the other little buggy distractions that X3 produced on my system. (I don't use the organizer.)

Bob

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi Paul

I don’t really understand just what you have done to the image.
It started as 4608 x 3072, now that’s a 14 MB sized image, should be excellent quality.
So why have you reduced the image to 800 x 533, now that’s about 0.5 MB.

Literally throwing away 13.5 Mb of detail???

You asked “Why does the quality of the photo degrade so much in X4 when doing nothing more than re-sizing??”
Well you haven’t just resized the image you have reduced it to a ridiculously small size.

The default resolution as you put it being the print resolution, it will print the image as 2.6 in x 1.7 in.

How are you viewing the image to check the quality, if on your monitor in full screen then its gonna look pretty poor.

[flagpole]

Hi Paul

I don’t really understand just what you have done to the image.
It started as 4608 x 3072, now that’s a 14 MB sized image, should be excellent quality.
So why have you reduced the image to 800 x 533, now that’s about 0.5 MB.

Literally throwing away 13.5 Mb of detail???

You asked “Why does the quality of the photo degrade so much in X4 when doing nothing more than re-sizing??”
Well you haven’t just resized the image you have reduced it to a ridiculously small size.

The default resolution as you put it being the print resolution, it will print the image as 2.6 in x 1.7 in.

How are you viewing the image to check the quality, if on your monitor in full screen then its gonna look pretty poor.

i think trevor you have confused your megapixels with your megabytes.

but the OP's point is that performing the same resize operation in X4 as in X2 produces an image of worse quality in X4, as you can see.
'So why have you reduced the image to 800 x 533' happen that is the size he wants it.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi

Point taken ------ and yes I did mean megapixels

[Hooterville]

It's hurrying that caused the problem in the first place don't pressure them. We want good not fast.

With Corel I don't think we will see either, good or fast.

[paulhubbard]

Okay, somewhat "my bad" - In looking at the differences between the two versions using the same action (SHIFT-S) I notice X4 has a default resolution of 72 dpi, and a "sharpen" factor of 0. X2 defaults to 300 dip with a sharpen factor of 50.

After changing the settings in x4 and then comparing apples to apples, the results are identical... still it's inconvenient to have to adjust settings for every photo I want to re-size. Guess I'll have to learn scripting - Or learn to process photos BEFORE drinking beer

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi Paul

I have just installed PSP X4, I looked at the Re-Size options and the sharpening factor is definitely 50, don’t know why you are seeing “0”

Not to worry, I would stick with the beer even if it’s a little cloudy.

I do know there is an issue with X4 defaulting to 72 ppi, got to get my head round that one...............

[almac_1]

In X4, however, the Pixel/inch defaults to 72.

I'm a newbie to this Web Board as I wished to contribute my two cents worth on this X4 issue.

I don't see this as a default to 72, but rather as a troubling and confusing defect in the program. Bear with me as I try to explain my comparison of X2 and X4 concerning this defect.

First In X2:
I opened an image and verified its information by clicking on Image/Image Information...
The Image Information tab reports the image to be:
Dimensions: 3264 x 2448 pixels and 18.133 x 13.600 inches. Pixels per Inch: 180.000

Clicking on the EXIF Information tab confirms this information by reporting the same thing:
Pixel Height: 2448, Pixel width: 3264, X resolution: 180.0dpi, Y resolution: 180.0dpi

If I close that drop-list and click on Image/Resize, the Original column of this drop-list again reports identical image info as above.

In summary, X2 consistently reports the same image information no matter what method I use to verify it.

Now In X4:
When I open the same image in X4 (while under the Manage tab) and look at the EXIF tab, EXIF reports identical image info as in X2.
BUT, if I then click on the Edit tab and click on Image/Resize, the Original column of the drop-list reports completely erroneous information. It says the original dimensions are 45.33 x 34.00 inches and original resolution is 72 pixels / inch.

This is causing complete confusion. Which is it? Has X4 altered the original image on its own and if so, why? Or is it just reporting the original image information incorrectly? Either way, it is a serious error. Until we can understand what the image is we are working with, I don't see the Edit function as being very useful yet.

I can't discern if this has anything to do with your problem, or not, Paul, but this one item alone has certainly made me unhappy about the quality of this software release.