[microlight]

Rondec: here's an update on what I've found. For comparison purposes I loaded the original ~156MB pixel shift DNG of the above scene back into the K-3II, and developed it into both TIFF and JPEG in camera - first time I've done this.


Both showed the same scene as in the above left image, no visible artifacts. The raw development options menu does actually have a selector for pixel shift on or off (it's on by default when you load the options up) but switching it to off appears to have no effect in the camera; there are still no artifacts in either case in the output file. But take the DNG into DCU5 and in the laboratory tabs, the default 'camera setting' view shows no artifacts - which you can switch off, and then it does make the difference shown above.

I can only conclude that for pixel shift in the K-3II;
- motion correction must be on permanently (there being no switch options),

- developing the DNG into TIFF/JPEG in camera shows no artifacts, so that the camera appears to be processing the four images down into one and then removing artifacts,

- artifacts do exist in the original DNG file because in DCU5 it's possible to turn the motion correction off, and see them clearly.

Fascinating discussion! And of course, keep on with the great images that you post here.

[northcoastgreg]

Yellowstone River at Dusk, with the DFA 15-30:

[Grippy]

P3II9569

[Rondec]

Rondec: here's an update on what I've found. For comparison purposes I loaded the original ~156MB pixel shift DNG of the above scene back into the K-3II, and developed it into both TIFF and JPEG in camera - first time I've done this.


Both showed the same scene as in the above left image, no visible artifacts. The raw development options menu does actually have a selector for pixel shift on or off (it's on by default when you load the options up) but switching it to off appears to have no effect in the camera; there are still no artifacts in either case in the output file. But take the DNG into DCU5 and in the laboratory tabs, the default 'camera setting' view shows no artifacts - which you can switch off, and then it does make the difference shown above.

I can only conclude that for pixel shift in the K-3II;
- motion correction must be on permanently (there being no switch options),

- developing the DNG into TIFF/JPEG in camera shows no artifacts, so that the camera appears to be processing the four images down into one and then removing artifacts,

- artifacts do exist in the original DNG file because in DCU5 it's possible to turn the motion correction off, and see them clearly.

Fascinating discussion! And of course, keep on with the great images that you post here.

I looked into it and I think I am wrong. The K3 II only offered motion correction on as the option of in-camera development.

I think the motion correction algorithm has improved with newer cameras and is done better in Raw Therapee, but it was offered on the K3 II.

[microlight]

Maybe I need to try RawTherapee again...!

[BruceBanner]

Maybe I need to try RawTherapee again...!

Honestly, I would say don't overly sweat it. Using DCU5/Silkypix vs RT, you'll find plenty of online web articles comparing and every review/comparison I have read puts RT ahead (and follows my own testing conclusions). But its like some serious pixelpeeping stuff. Like... I care about this stuff when going to print, and printing large! Up until now we really have never been able to appreciate the benefits of pixelshift vs non pixelshift shots because nowhere hosts full res jpgs for us to inspect. Having a pixelshift thread is almost pointless as we're limited to the upload size dimensions and Flickr restricts the display to 2048 on the longest edge... or at least it used to. Just think week I heard that Flickr will now support 6k native images from Pro users, so that will be interesting to see. Hopefully (on a good screen), viewing an image on Flickr will let the user see the original resolution shot and not the compressed version and the differences in using this feature more obvious.

[teiki arii]

As I am concerned, pixel shift is a must-have for scanning my B&W rolls and prints in piezography.

[BruceBanner]

As I am concerned, pixel shift is a must-have for scanning my B&W rolls and prints in piezography.

Ok, how does that work? Are you using something like this? Pentax Film Duplicator helps you scan 35mm and medium-format film quicker

Flash doesn't work with pixelshift (or rather it works only for the first frame). So if you have taken a film shot, how are you involving the pixelshift aspect for scan/print?

[teiki arii]

Ok, how does that work? Are you using something like this? Pentax Film Duplicator helps you scan 35mm and medium-format film quicker

No, I use my original modified enlarger where I fixed my Pentax K-1 (II) with Pentax Macro 50/2.8 on and shoot the negatve frame by frame. Enlarger's light source head is on the baseboard and the light is facing upwards to the negative through the diffusor. The camera is at the top of the system (replacing the inital enlarger head). The negative is placed of course between the light and the Pentax K-1 (Macro 50/2.8). The enlarger lens has been taken off. I focus thanks to the screen of the camera.

Flash doesn't work with pixelshift (or rather it works only for the first frame).

No it doesn't.

[BruceBanner]

As I am concerned, pixel shift is a must-have for scanning my B&W rolls and prints in piezography.

No, I use my original modified enlarger where I fixed my Pentax K-1 (II) with Pentax Macro 50/2.8 on and shoot the negatve frame by frame. Enlarger's light source head is on the baseboard and the light is facing upwards to the negative through the diffusor. The camera is at the top of the system (replacing the inital enlarger head). The negative is placed of course between the light and the Pentax K-1 (Macro 50/2.8). The enlarger lens has been taken off. I focus thanks to the screen of the camera.

No it doesn't.

Sounds interesting, anytime you wanna show us a BTS I'd quite like to see that

[teiki arii]

What is a BTS?

[BruceBanner]

What is a BTS?

Behind The Scenes

[teiki arii]

Behind The Scenes

Sorry, what does that mean? English is not my mother language (nor my father)..

[manishved]

I have still not mastered the art of editing Pixelshift images

[Mikesul]

Sorry, what does that mean? English is not my mother language (nor my father)..

It means something important which is not visible, or apparent, to the viewer. As at a play the stage manager is working behind the scene.