I took the attached image near the Henry Clay Frick mansion in Pittsburgh PA, back in July of 2008. I had my first digital SLR with me. It was a Sony α100, the first digital single-lens reflex camera marketed by Sony in 2006. It is the successor to the previous Konica Minolta DSLR models through Sony's purchase of the Konica Minolta camera division. This was not a full frame camera and had a 10 MP sensor. I was using a rebranded 100mm Minolta FF macro lens on it when I took the attached photo of a bee in the garden by the Frick Mansion. Today you can buy this camera on e-Bay for about $100.
I’m attaching two versions of the same photo. The first one was as taken years ago:
While not a bad photo for the time, tonight I pulled up that old photo and applied some modern software adjustments to it. Namely I used “Topaz Sharpener AI” "Too soft" option and a little NIK filters. The results are the image below:
I find it remarkable how much sharper the flower and bee appears the second image appears to be!
Please take the time to Download the images to see the difference,
Prior to digital corrections
(
Download)
After the application of the Topaz Sharpener AI tool and a tiny amount of adjustment to the shadows.
(
Download)
I also find Topaz AI amazingly good at sharpening.
Great that you shared the 'before' and 'after' photos. Nice picture, regardless of hardware. But made so much more eye catching with Topaz Sharpen AI.
We all should probably look at some of our earlier photos to see how much they can be improved with more modern image processing software.
Paul Diamond wrote:
Great that you shared the 'before' and 'after' photos. Nice picture, regardless of hardware. But made so much more eye catching with Topaz Sharpen AI.
We all should probably look at some of our earlier photos to see how much they can be improved with more modern image processing software.
I was pleasantly surprised with the results.
Great example! Looking at the soft details of the original, I'd expect to see the sharpened details to seem over-sharpened. Amazingly, no. The processed version looks like it was taken by a different camera and lens. It almost seems like in the hairs of the bee, the software has added details that were not there, but all completely natural.
There is definitely a difference.
CHG_CANON wrote:
Great example! Looking at the soft details of the original, I'd expect to see the sharpened details to seem over-sharpened. Amazingly, no. The processed version looks like it was taken by a different camera and lens. It almost seems like in the hairs of the bee, the software has added details that were not there, but all completely natural.
This blows my mind! How can the program recover details that I could not see in the original image that I provided, when I could not see these details myself?! I guess that's what AI is all about. I'm also amazed that the program was smart enough to to NOT sharpen the softly focused flower in the background.
Thanks for your comments.
Quite an improvement Dave - illustrates the superb job Topaz Denoise AI does.
Now a lot of folks can see why many of use Topaz software. If only their upgrades costs weren't so darn high.
The improvement is absolutely amazing.
Topaz does do a great job, Dave, well done.
In Luminar AI the sharp and clear template will sharpen as well or almost as well as Topaz in a fraction of the time. I use both. Luminar was my last step in processing but now I run my images through Luminar before Topaz because by doing that Topaz has little to nothing to correct cutting down on the processing time.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.