On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 13:23:48 -0500, Ms.Goody2Shoes
<nunyabeezwax@thehive.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:27:14 +1000, Pixie <Pixie@AnnWheatley.com.invalid>
>wrote in:
><89o5f69p29pv85g1pnek3iib9o4gjvhggs@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 19:07:12 -0500, Ms.Goody2Shoes
>><nunyabeezwax@thehive.com> wrote:
>>
[...]
>>Hope you have a go at it. You'll never, never know if you never have a
>>go!
>Right you are! I will try some on my own.
>
Excellent!
You are the best judge of what you will accept as a good job. :-)
> But I think I'll leave the fsl one alone.
>
Yeah, I resized it for practice. It "seemed" ok for a small resize,
but it lost a lot of detail taking it down to the size you wanted.
I would have been nervous when immersing it in water to take out the
stabiliser!
> As I said to holita, I thought you would tell me that.
>
Hmmm. It's the amount of detail in both designs that is making it a
challenge. Lots of places where the program just has to "guess" which
bit you want/need to keep.
>Thanks for your time to help me understand the best way to have a crack at
>it.
Nah worries!
Don't be afraid to try it. Just be aware of the restrictions of the
file you are trying to resize. Details get "lost" sometimes in a
resize.
Most programs resize these days. Resizing is easy! _Quality_ resizing
is not so easy!
You can resize and then spend hours inserting/fixing stitches one at a
time in edit mode if you are really patient!
It just depends what sort of "mess" the resizing does.
Pixie :-))
|
|