Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Enhance Details

Subject: Re: [OM] Enhance Details
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 21:06:27 -0800
On 2/14/2019 5:05 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
WSM writes: <<<<I'd like to see the Raw file for that example, to see how DxO works with it. It generally seems to a better job with moire than ACR. DXO has had an anti- moiré feature for a few versions. Several versions ago they put priority on having the best (or close to) demosaicing algorithm. Hard to tell if adobe has leapfrogged them. Would have to turn off the default amount of deconvolution to tell.

I'm not sure what to call this. It's not only moiré, it's false colors (as the below link clearly shows) and other artifacts of demosaicing color sensel arrays. And - it's really tricksy. Examples with one subject may not be representative of what will result with another.

As I was looking into resolution with the GX9, I happen to have lots of test images. Fortunately, I have a reference standard. Shooting with HR mode on the E-M5 II samples each pixel location with sensels of each color, so there is no demosaicing to interpolate colors. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Process/Moire_plus/Moire+.htm>

The HR Raw file is quite soft. Oly deals with this by using sharpening for the JPEG version. They also produced an ACR/LR plug-in. Unfortunately, however, it uses simple USM, and generates bad halos. Fortunately, deconvolution, here in the form of Focus Magic, nicely improves visible details. In the second image, you can see clearly the crosshatch pattern of the background to Tom J.

In the second row, ACR, with no sharpening or NR does a fairly nice job of showing the vertical part of the, background, while hinting at the horizontal, with moderate moire. I'm not sure whether it's default sharpening and NR settings improve the false color, or mask it, but it is less obvious. The HR image, downsized to 16 MP shows what demosaicing has lost.

Third row is DxO PhotoLab*/ Not much to choose from in sharpness with straight conversion. In both PL cases, I added a conversion with "Lens Sharpening" set below the default, @ -1, as the default seemed to go too far, esp. in the color of his coat. With ACR default and PL -1, false color has been masked/corrected about the same amount. Tom seems a bit less sharp in PL, but the signature "Cabral" and the text "United States" below it look cleaner.

The really interesting thing is what it has done with the background grid pattern, with various brightish white lines, horizontal dominating in some places, vertical in others. I think mushing out details is better than this creation of artificial ones. PL 0 just makes the background more so, while putting halos around script and text.

For the 20 MP GX9 files, I'd call it for PL, slight, but definite edge in resolution of fine detail - if converting a file sans fine grid pattern that interacts strangely with PL


Fourth row is a 16 MP file, ACR, no sharpening or NR, default settings and the HR file, downsampled. Even at this smaller size, it almost holds the grid pattern, and doesn't alter it in any way.

Fifth row is the new ACR/LR "Enhanced Detail" function, which demosaics differently, writing the result in to an external DNG file. With no Sharpening and NR, it does improve the false color. With default USM and NR, it's very subtly different, but I can't say an improvement. I'm glad it doesn't do magic, as it is stone slow on my Win10 portable. Takes over the poor little GPU and stops everything else - just close the lid and come back later, much later.

Sixth row is DxO PhotoLab, no Lens Sharpening, Lens Sharpening = -1 and =0, the default. Not much to choose from in the first two columns - except, PL enhances the false color in col 2, rather making it less obvious.

For the 16 MP E-M5 II files, it's pretty much even, except for the false color 
in the grid with PL.

Row seven is just some other 16 MP bodies, to show they all have false color, 
but it varies.

As I'm interested in the best converter for my GX9 files, I've been doing some other testing that highlights other differences. Soon to come to a roll-over near you?

Tedium Moose

* Notes:
The difference in image size between ACR and PL from the same Raw file are the result of different distortion correction. That can't be turned off in ACR/LR, so I left it on in PL.

Why the colors are different in different ways 'tween ACR and PL on GX9 vs. 
E-M5 II is a mystery to me.

Some samples are tilted because the tape I used dropped Tom, and I didn't get 
him back perfectly.
Another good example of the new procedure:

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/adobe-camera-raw-11-2-enhance-details/


What moiré?  Mike


--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz