








(2)
Your rating: Now say why...





(11)


| Downloads:50,869 |
| Version Downloads:289 |
| Type:Multimedia & Design : Image Editing |
| License:Demo |
| Date:10 May 2012 |
| Platform:PPC / Intel |
| Price: $219.00 |
Overall (Version 4.x):![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Features:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ease of Use:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Value:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Stability:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
+3
+5
For the Reviews section, we often receive low-res images from the client because that's all they have access to. To save time and aggravation, we use Photozoom to "res-up" the images with great results.
I recommend it to anyone working on publication design.
+2
+5
For the Reviews section, we often receive low-res images from the client because that's all they have access to. To save time and aggravation, we use Photozoom to "res-up" the images with great results.
I recommend it to anyone working on publication design.
+2
+82
Beige reviewed on 05 Mar 2010
+2
+7
+2
+7
+3
-49
For those who like the same effects (not very far from the results of PZ) but a whole lot cheaper (free). Try this:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/31807/imageenlarger
I've tested it and the results look very decent. The price is $0.00
That's my 2 cents.
I still love PZoom tho!
-1
-206
MacTechHead reviewed on 13 Jul 2009
But I really liked this version. Did exactly what I wanted with great results.
Excellent product and well worth the asking price.
Thanks for the great work on PhotoZoom Pro !!
-1
-49
Mac-Mail reviewed on 01 Jul 2009
+1
-65
-49
http://members.shaw.ca/bmsound/A_002.jpg
It's a screenshot that I did. The left was done with V3 and the right was done with V2.3.4 They were both enlarged to 12" wide 200 dpi in Generic mode from a original at 4" wide at 144 dpi. Absolutely no other enhancement were done on either one. The V3 process took 4 times longer than the V2.
That's why I prefer V2.
That's my 2 cents.
-65
-49
+29
The PZP stand-alone app. produced a 9.7MB file, while the GFPP plug-in made a 6.4MB image, both set for best quality.
Side-by-side Preview magnifications show the GFPP image to be more defined.
+29
PZP took about 38 minutes on a G4-dual 1.33GHz (upgraded) Mac with 1.5GB RAM, both CPUs just over 70% mark. The resulting image was over 216MB with same quality as the original JPEG.
GFPP used full capacity from both CPUs, and never completed it's task; many minutes into the process, CS3 froze.
+29
The PZP stand-alone app. produced a 9.7MB file, while the GFPP plug-in made a 6.4MB image, both set for best quality.
Side-by-side Preview magnifications show the GFPP image to be more defined.
+167
BUT, I don't care what others charge. Bottomline for me is... The bottomline. I have to enlarge and sell quite a few images to make this app worth its price.
This is the same situation as audio plug-ins. Very expensive. More expensive than a lot of full audio editing applications.
Okay okay, this app has patented technology whatever. A lot probably goes into research and development - or does it?
And apart from that I don't find its results to be THAT much better than straight Bicubic done with a bit of care in other image editing apps.
Still, if this app was priced more modestly, I'd maybe purchase it. Of course it is a niche app, which makes the price go up, but I'd bet there are users using pirated/cracked copies of these apps, instead of purchasing. Personally I'd like to add this kind of software to my toolbox, if only I could afford it.
+6
I hope this will be fixed soon.
This issue occurred on some PowerPC systems, but now it produces the correct result everywhere.
+47
Werty rated on 05 Apr 2011
Glo8al rated on 07 Dec 2010