Camera raw 13.2 has a new feature called super resolution in which the software doubles the number of pixels. The first image is enhanced from APC mode which is 5616 x 3744 pixels.
The enhancement is 3792 pixels by 2856 pixels. The second image is the non-enhanced image also from the same photograph. The un-enhanced size is 2072 pixels by 1470 pixels. So the enhanced images essentially doubled. I think I see some improvement in the image quality with the enhanced image. These unenhanced image is essentially 6% of the normal full frame.
To get to this feature, open in camera raw a raw, TIF, or JPEG . Right click on the image and at the bottom where you will see the word enhance. Click on enhance and make your choices. It is pretty self-explanatory. It does take half a minute or more for the process to evolve.
Topaz labs has a similar product called Gigapixel AI. I think it is a little more difficult to use because the image cannot be opened in either Photoshop or Light Room. It seems easier to me to leave everything in Photoshop or camera raw.
Specific Feedback Requested
I did get some sharpening halos on this image but I found that the enhanced image had fewer sharpening halos. Both images were processed with Light Room, Topaz De noise AI, and Photoshop including camera raw.
Technical Details
Is this a composite: No
Iso-320, 400+1.4 X, F5, 2000th
Overall, a nice singing pose, perch, and background and good detail. To my old eyes I can discern better IQ in the perch in the first shot and probably a bit in the bird, but I prefer the second shot as it is brighter.
I gave it a try on three images. I thought there was a slight improvement-mainly the eye on the bird seemed sharper in all three. The file size almost quadruples, bit there didn’t seem to be any change in the pixel count. I did this in LR.
I like the nice singing pose and also prefer the bigger and brighter stage of the second one. Also second image has a catchlight. I can’t see any difference in image quality between the tow. Nice job on the blacks.
Hi David. I can’t discern a difference at web size. The second, being brighter feel marginally crisper and I think I see a tiny bit more fine structure in the epaulet, but I think it would take a larger version to discern any difference.
I’m confused which one was “doubled” – the top one? Did the software darken it on its own? The halos in the second one have been taken care of, and there is some sort of rainbow effect on the darkest areas in the bottom one that are not in the top one.
Hi David, nice singing pose - well caught with a fine background. I like the brighter version in the second image but I do see the distortion in the lower part of the bird that Diane mentions. The eye of the bird in the top image seems cloudy - I’m not sure what would cause that.
The top image is the enhanced version with pixels doubled. The bottom version is the original. I don’t know if my processing on the first image was improved but I see some color distortion in several places on the second image. To me at high magnification, I think there is an improvement. I have done several other images with this tool and I find it to work quite well.
