On 3/26/2021 6:30 AM, DZDub wrote:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 12:52 AM Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The one piece that I mention often is the "sharpening" effect on low ISO
images (Defined here, with contemporary
cameras, as below 800.) of Topaz Denoise AI. As no one ever responds,
positive or negative, perhaps they don't believe
me, don't care . . . ?
One of a few examples I've posted.
<
http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Process/Topaz%20AI/TopazDenoise%20modes/TopazNRAI.htm
I'm not viewing from my big monitor at the moment, but I've looked at
similar examples you've posted at my 24". Since most of us do the mail
from laptops, I'll wager, we're probably not doing you justice from the
outset with this example. But I suspect that you are also demonstrating a
certain connoisseurship in the demonstration. You're trying to illustrate
which wine goes best with the pate fois gras when the rest of us are
perfectly happy with Two-Buck Chuck and beanie weenies. The differences
may be greater in your discovery process than can be delivered to a
stranger's eye. Plus, I know that I still distrust my monitor to effect
such nuances even though I probably shouldn't (see below).
It should be pretty obvious that #2 "recovers" the most detail, but at the cost of halo(-ish) artifacts around hard
edges. #3 reveals almost as much detail, while being very clean, suitable for further sharpening with Sharpen AI.
And here a whole slew of subjects.
http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Process/Topaz%20AI/TopazDenoiseAI_sharpen/TzDeNAIshrp.htm
The result is that I use AI Sharpen seldom, relative to Denoise.AI
Easier to see the effect here even on a laptop. I will give Denoise a
trial. It is interesting the way noise and sharpening increments seem to
be built into all three of Topaz's products. Rocks my world a little.
The thing to remember is that these tools are not the result of someone writing code. NN learning is subject to the Law
of Unintended Consequences. Depending on what it's fed, it may do something else, in addition to the intended use. I
suspect that's the reason for the detail enhancing aspects of some Denoise AI settings on some photos.
It might think of the NR sliders in Sharpen AI as "suppress artifacts of sharpening". Sharpening of any sort has a
tendency to elevate subtle noise into obviousness. That's why I virtually never sharpen, whatever way, without first
doing NR.
So if you do happen to use Sharpen AI after Denoise, do you let AI work
(i.e., auto), or do you null out the NR effects and so forth (i.e., go
manual)? (I like to see what AI wants to do most of the time and generally
like the result or at least feel there is some improvement -- but not
always.)
I do settings manually. At first, I tried the Auto settings, and found them to almost always be too high, and given to
artifacts. There have been lots of updates since then, so Auto may have improved, but by now, I know pretty much what
works for me on the kind of images I process. Auto is never going to suggest 21, 1, 15 for Denoise, but that's magic for
stomping the minimal noise at low ISO, while enhancing detail.
Unfortunately, they don't (yet?) allow saving profiles. But they do remember my
last settings for each mode.
The latest version of both, last couple of days, make some big changes. They have rewritten their AI engine, so it runs
much faster. Now, by default, they open up and v. quickly process previews of all three modes, using the last used
settings. This is a huge time saving for me. I immediately see the differences and can change settings and see the
results almost immediately.
out images from my Canon 300D! 😁
Some of the best images I've ever taken were done with that camera. A
little photo essay from 2004.
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/SteepFalls/index.htm>
I've revisited some of them at various times over the years, as post
processing software has improved, along with my
skills with it.
Those are very crisp images!
Thanks! Done with PS and whatever plug-ins I had in 2004.
"Revisiting" is sort of where I'm at right
now. I can't really travel as I'm the primary caregiver for my 98-year-old
mother.
You have my sympathies. When I was in that role, I could take short breaks, when my heavy business travel brother was in
town, but nothing like the extended travel since, up to 2019, when we were away 91 days, OTOH, I wouldn't trade that
time with Mom for anything.
Otherwise, there's what's in the yard and tidying up the computer. We haven't
seen our kids for well over a year. I seek out
photos from their infancy and childhood that, if they had seen before, they
didn't care about, and I shoot them to them in texts. They are thrilled
with them now. It's emotional for me in so many ways
Great idea! I should do some of that.
-- it will soon be over, I hope.
I've been rethinking my mindset as I give the E-1 images a workover.
Images now live far more as efforts that are judged by how they appear on a
monitor than as printed works. I don't think anyone probably still thinks
entirely of a workflow whose terminus ad quem is a print (let alone a "fine
print"), unless that's our job. Yet that has been part of my calculus for
most of my digital life. As a result, I have tended to think unimportant
the minor issues on screen which I know will not transfer to a print. And
I would do things like output sharpening a la Bruce Fraser that seem to
improve prints in some ways but certainly ruin the image as a screen objet
d'art.
Not sure I agree. I do output sharpening for the vast majority of the images I post on the web. Downsizing always takes
off the sense of sharpness, and I like to restore it. I've printed several photo books, ~8x10 pages, and 8x20 doubles,
that work amazingly well with the lay flat page options. Final sharpening that looks good on screen @ 100% had looked
great in print.
I should mention that I still mostly use Focus Magic for resharpening after downsizing. On a separate level, opacity and
masking employed. I imagine there are Sharpen AI settings to do what I want, but I don't know them, and am following an
"if it ain't broke . . ." path.
Amongst all my digital paraphernalia, it's the monitors which seem
to have improved the most. I'm still viscerally attracted to an attractive
print, but I no longer cling to the assumption that the print is the
ultimate revelation of what the photograph is or should be. As a practical
matter, it's been that way for years, but my head has not been there. I'm
actually only just accepting this sort of awareness.
Give someone a link, and they may look, but will often not look closely, or linger. Hand them a book, and most will take
the time to appreciate it. I've found the feedback from watching someone go through my book(s) illuminating, whether
they engage me in the process or I just watch as they look.
I am a full convert to mirrorless. Some OMs in the house, but no DSLRs,
unless I've missed one. 😉
It becomes easier over time to miss one here or there. 8^0
I'm not claiming any prescience, but my very happy experience with the
C8080 convinced me that something like mirrorless was the way to go. I
don't know if any camera with the Olympus marque will ever be made in the
future that I might be interested in,
I had converted to Panny, except for an E-M5 II kept for HR Mode for lens testing and macro. The 100-400, MC14 TC and
ProCaptureL have dragged me back into the fold with an E-M1 II.
It's a learning curve, but I think will be worth it. (GAWD, I hate the on-off
switch location!)
but I think I should eventually get a
E-M1 iii just to allow my E system lenses a nice ride into the sunset.
I have a friend who has been doing that with an E-M1 II. He has some E-System Pro lenses, and has been very happy with
them on the E-M1 II. We were just chatting about it yesterday.
That would probably be more fun when there is a chance to take a photo trip
again.
May it be so!
I wouldn't mind a Sony but just am not gripped with GASious
desire.
Were it not for my interest in "crappy" lenses from the past, my OM Macro lenses and gear and my Alt.Moose alter
photographic ego, I would not have one. It WAS fun buying a "parts only" 600/6.5, fixing it, and trying it out on an A7,
but that was Covid entertainment. What do i do with the lens now? 😁
An A7R would be interesting to play with. Maybe I'll try out a
beater one of these days to see.
I just replaced my original A7 with an A7R II. Rationales, IBIS and higher res
for macro.
Nattering Moose
--
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/
|