Amin
Hall of Famer
One of the emails I received after publishing Part 3 of the shootout suggested that I would achieve better results using Genuine Fractals rather than Photoshop Bicubic Smoother to upscale DP1 files. Therefore, I have decided to use this method in presenting some additional samples of landscape detail obtained with the Sigma DP1, Canon 5D, and Olympus E-420.
I've been using Genuine Fractals for a couple months now and really like it. Genuine Fractals does an excellent job of preserving detail while limiting aliasing effects. Below is a comparison of three different methods used to upsize a Sigma SD14 (same sensor as DP1) portrait taken by Carl Rytterfalk and shared at his excellent website, www.rytterfalk.com. Click the image for the intended viewing size:
Although Blow Up shows the least aliasing artifacts in the facial hair, there are visible artifacts in a diagonal pattern visible throughout the skin, made more apparent with subsequent sharpening. Genuine Fractals also creates occasional artifacts when upscaling, some of which are more obvious than others. However, the main reason I didn't use Genuine Fractals in Part 3 is that most people will use the tools built into Photoshop to upscale if they are going to upscale at all.
For this supplemental comparison, I used Genuine Fractals 5 as suggested. The technical details regarding the camera settings and processing choices are otherwise unchanged from what I wrote here. Once again I used the Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 lens on the 5D and the Olympus ZD 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on the E-420. Before showing the samples, I'll just repeat two things for emphasis: 1) Processing choices were subjective, and the impression of detail can be changed by sharpening one file more than another. Therefore, consider processing the files yourself from the RAW files available at the end of this post. 2) These samples reflect both the camera and the lens used. The advantage of one camera over the other, from a detail standpoint, can be reversed with alternative lens choices.
The DP1 and E-420 samples shown below represent 100% crops of images that have been upsized to match the native 5D output size (12MP).
The specific area of examination is depicted by the yellow box in the resized photo preceding each set of crops.
An odd vertical line is visible in the middle crop above. I'm assuming that this was introduced by GF, but I am not certain.
All three crops showing some aliasing effects above, the Olympus less so than the other two.
Overall, my conclusions from this comparison are no different than those in Part 3.
<embed src="http://www.box.net/static/flash/box_explorer.swf?widgetHash=tx3brph4ww&v=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="600" height="200">
In Part 4, we'll take a look at the low light, high ISO performance of the same three cameras in addition to the current compact camera high ISO champ, the Fuji F31.
Originally published on the old Serious Compacts blog. Older comments can be found here: DP1 Shootout Pt. 3s - Landscape Detail Comparison Supplement
I've been using Genuine Fractals for a couple months now and really like it. Genuine Fractals does an excellent job of preserving detail while limiting aliasing effects. Below is a comparison of three different methods used to upsize a Sigma SD14 (same sensor as DP1) portrait taken by Carl Rytterfalk and shared at his excellent website, www.rytterfalk.com. Click the image for the intended viewing size:
Although Blow Up shows the least aliasing artifacts in the facial hair, there are visible artifacts in a diagonal pattern visible throughout the skin, made more apparent with subsequent sharpening. Genuine Fractals also creates occasional artifacts when upscaling, some of which are more obvious than others. However, the main reason I didn't use Genuine Fractals in Part 3 is that most people will use the tools built into Photoshop to upscale if they are going to upscale at all.
For this supplemental comparison, I used Genuine Fractals 5 as suggested. The technical details regarding the camera settings and processing choices are otherwise unchanged from what I wrote here. Once again I used the Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 lens on the 5D and the Olympus ZD 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on the E-420. Before showing the samples, I'll just repeat two things for emphasis: 1) Processing choices were subjective, and the impression of detail can be changed by sharpening one file more than another. Therefore, consider processing the files yourself from the RAW files available at the end of this post. 2) These samples reflect both the camera and the lens used. The advantage of one camera over the other, from a detail standpoint, can be reversed with alternative lens choices.
The DP1 and E-420 samples shown below represent 100% crops of images that have been upsized to match the native 5D output size (12MP).
The specific area of examination is depicted by the yellow box in the resized photo preceding each set of crops.
An odd vertical line is visible in the middle crop above. I'm assuming that this was introduced by GF, but I am not certain.
All three crops showing some aliasing effects above, the Olympus less so than the other two.
Overall, my conclusions from this comparison are no different than those in Part 3.
<embed src="http://www.box.net/static/flash/box_explorer.swf?widgetHash=tx3brph4ww&v=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="600" height="200">
In Part 4, we'll take a look at the low light, high ISO performance of the same three cameras in addition to the current compact camera high ISO champ, the Fuji F31.
Originally published on the old Serious Compacts blog. Older comments can be found here: DP1 Shootout Pt. 3s - Landscape Detail Comparison Supplement
