Gigapixel - another example

dragonfly

dragonfly

Advertiser
Messages
1,728
Name
Des
Edit My Images
No
I'm amazed at what software is able to do these days. I always try to get a full-frame shot in order to retain the maximum resolution for image/print sales. But images in the past were limited by the tech. For example, the image below was taken a few years ago and is only 6MP. I've heard some good reviews about the titled software so I thought wouldn't it be nice if I can bring my library of images from the past to the more current higher-res standards. So I downloaded the software to give it a whirl. I must say I'm impressed. I've included the first file I tried, of a Goldfinch. The result is not perfect, but certainly usable.

gigapixel-1.jpg

gigapixel-2.jpg

gigapixel-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
It may not be 100% perfect on every subject but it is quite something !

As your trial is recent, is this result with using v5.0.2 ???
 
Here's another extreme example. The original 20MP file was from a D500, taken late in the afternoon. The enlargement made it 66MP!
gigapixel.jpg
 
dragonfly said:
Here's another extreme example. The original 20MP file was from a D500, taken late in the afternoon. The enlargement made it 66MP!
gigapixel.jpg
Click to expand...
Very interesting, but what's the point?

In your original example, you should be able to get a decent 30 x 40 cm print from a 6MP file without any messing around.
If you're making 6 meter high posters then the IQ depends on the viewing distance.
 
Brian G said:
Very interesting, but what's the point?

In your original example, you should be able to get a decent 30 x 40 cm print from a 6MP file without any messing around.
If you're making 6 meter high posters then the IQ depends on the viewing distance.
Click to expand...
For the most part, it was curiosity that got me trying first. Then having discovered what the software can do, I wanted to 'update' my image library.

For stock use, it's up to the clients what resolution they want. The greater the pixel count, the more flexible an image becomes. As I have no idea how my images might be used, as an image maker, it makes sense to provide options.

It's worth mentioning that requirements do change over time. For example, if you print the newer HD photobooks now, the difference is quite obvious if the resolution is not there. The standard photobooks or conventional litho/magazine printing, not so much.
 
To me this looks the same as if you magnified the original picture to 200% or so and added some extra structure. I don't see any signs of AI placing in carefully what would have been there if you'd used a higher pixel count body.

My advice, if you want phase one resolution, you need to buy phase one, or at least Hassleblad or learn to stitch pictures and that only works with static subjects like landscapes and architecure.
 
More than one way to skin the cat for sure and it goes without saying that having a higher res capture will be far more superior than upscaling. It's the ease of use that appeals. There are more suitable bodies like the Nikon D850 (45MP) or Sony A7R4 (61MP) that are more suitable than medium formats that would work but I'm looking at images that have already been taken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top