Hip Coyote

An example of Adobe's Super Resolution, Adobe Content Aware Fill and Topaz AI Sharpening. I was in the Amazon so conditions were dark. The original shot was taken with a M43 consumer-level lens (14-150 Oly). It was fuzzy and washed out. Enlarging the file size to 64 mp, getting rid of some errant fronds, sharpening up the subject and doing a few other things helped. Highlights in eyes were enhanced a little bit as well. Not perfect but much better than what I could do prior.

Just to get people to start arguing, I also credit shooting in RAW as a benefit on this shot.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Super resolution on a thumbnail display?????

Hip Coyote

The meta data says 63.7 mp...it quadrupled the size of the image. Darned near a miracle. And the file size after using super res, and Topaz putting the thing back into a tiff is 1.37 gigs.

I kinda understand the difference between mp and mb, but in any event, that is a lot of enhancement.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Ron beat me to it, sounds like a lot of effort and purchased software to create an internet thumbnail.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Quadruple the size of the file doesn't mean 4x better quality. If I add 4 cups sugar to my cookie recipe that calls for one cup, it will likely yield results to put straight in the trash.

To go through the effort to discuss your effort and then not present the results really is a waste of the effort.

Hip Coyote

Ok. Now I get it. This is the first time I have posted a photo for this kind of discussion. Perhaps a little friendly help next time? Like “post the entire file so we can see it?”! And what you gain from it. I had no idea.

When I get home I’ll re do the post. I was just showing an example of the capabilities and thought this was sufficient. Anyhoo. Will remedy.

Hip Coyote

Quadruple the file size does allow the original crop to not be too small. At least that is what I interpret the idea as.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Your attachment, in bytes, is limited to 20MB at UHH, so you might look at the resizing options.

Start with the largest pixel size, the length x width. You probably can't attach that file, but if you adjust the JPEG quality, how small in bytes can you get the file while retaining all the super-sized pixels? Can you adjust the JPEG quality such that you can get the file to 20MB or smaller?

What does the file look like at say resized to 6000x4000px (24MP)? That might be a useful comparison to a run of the mill fullframe sensor.

Hip Coyote

I can’t say I purchased the software to post stuff on the internet. I mostly do books for our travels. Make pics for family. Etc. it’s a hobby that I am learning.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I'm with you on the learning part and I'm trying to peal some of the onion to get at the usefulness and purpose of these software, if any. How big of a book? How big of a family print?

Take my 4000x6000px example above. That 24MP file is going to print to 20x30in at 300 ppi (pixel per inch). That's 20x30in direct from the camera with no resizing, and that file is probably bigger than any need in a book and as well as making a 'gold standard' quality wall hanging.

The probing questions are to try to understand what specifically are you trying to accomplish and how (if) these tools support that need.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

Wow, what a post, kind of like a bunch of hyenas pouncing on a helpless animal and one of you is a Moderator on three Forums on UHH

Only CHG_Canon took the time and effort to understand the OP's post and provide helpful information and assistance.

Hip Coyote

I am not trying to get anyone's input on the size of a book. I have done about 25 of them so far from our travels, family events, memory books, etc. The point of the post was to simply display the usefulness of the software. Hence, the before and after. Nothing more. It was a demonstration for fellow hogs. I have never downloaded someone else's photographs and probably never would. But now I get it.

I shoot a 16 mp M43 camera. So size is not something I am concerned about (in more ways than one!) In rare instances when I see a better shot inside a photograph and I want to dramatically crop something, then super res may help me. I can enlarge the image and crop with less loss of resolution. In cases where I goofed up the focus or shook a little bit too much, Topaz can rescue my shot. Otherwise, I pp my shots in LR or PS and move on. My average photo is less than 10 mb.

The super res is included in the Adobe subscription. I have Topaz from years ago and don't use it more than once in a blue moon. To me, photography is a way to connect with people, to find a little peace after a very stressful career, capture some memories and learn something new. This was offered in that spirit.

I resized the images and have attached them.

(Download)


(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

It would help to understand the original image and how much cropping occurred before any processing? Regarding the upsizing, why to 6324x4743? That's bigger than the 24MP / 20x30in image discussed before, from a 16MP image, at least before cropping? Was the image an experiment or purposeful to that size?

For wildlife, of course you'll likely need to crop. I try to retain at least 2048px in the crop. If I can't do that for the composition, I may upsize edited results when exporting from LR to 2048px on the long side for online sharing. For printing, I'll balance printing with a ppi less than 300ppi vs upsizing the image just to the specifics on the intended print.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

They look good.

I have only one comment, but this maybe be your intent: The final(?) one appears to be over saturated.

When it comes to cropping... I am not a fan of it, at all. That is likely why I do not go wildlife shooting as I would want a great telephoto and those are often more expensive than the camera and would have very little use in the end...

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

This is your attempted apology to the OP? He may accept it. I hope he does. I don't. I think you disgraced your position as a Moderator. JMHO