Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-12-2020, 01:51 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
microlight's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 1,699
Interesting thread, thanks for starting it, Eddy. Being a bear of simplistic brain, it seems to me that its prime purpose is to make the four sub-frames of a pixel shifted photo shoot processable in many raw editor applications such as Lightroom/ACR rather than them extracting just one of the four, and processing that one. This seems to ignore motion correction, so could only really be useful in absolute still life where thereís no movement whatsoever. This is clearly not the intent as otherwise there wouldnít have been the facility for motion correction in the first place.

I also thought that the more recent versions of Lr/ACR could indeed process and combine all four component pictures in a PS raw file, but did not deal with motion correction? If so, then this program would surely be redundant for those users.

I guess what Iím saying is that except for specialist still life, I canít see the point of it... See, bear of simplistic brain! 🤪

04-12-2020, 02:01 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,914
QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
Thus far I can absolutely confirm from ONE test that the 75mb PS2DNG file is superior to the single frame regular normal DNG file in terms of pixelshift advantages, but it might be a scale, and that DCU5/Silkypix/RT do it better.
Ok. Have you tried PS2DNG with a file containing PS motion artifacts? The reason I uninstalled PS2DNG from my computer was that I saw no difference between SPD9 treating Pentax PS files and treating PS2DNG, without much information in PS2DNG documentation, I concluded that PS2DNG was more for Sony users since they have separate files and no a single DNG file like we have from Pentax.
What would be the benefit of PS2DNG for Pentax?

Last edited by biz-engineer; 04-12-2020 at 02:06 AM.
04-12-2020, 02:44 AM   #18
Pentaxian
BruceBanner's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 5,200
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by microlight Quote
Interesting thread, thanks for starting it, Eddy. Being a bear of simplistic brain, it seems to me that its prime purpose is to make the four sub-frames of a pixel shifted photo shoot processable in many raw editor applications such as Lightroom/ACR rather than them extracting just one of the four, and processing that one. This seems to ignore motion correction, so could only really be useful in absolute still life where thereís no movement whatsoever. This is clearly not the intent as otherwise there wouldnít have been the facility for motion correction in the first place.

I also thought that the more recent versions of Lr/ACR could indeed process and combine all four component pictures in a PS raw file, but did not deal with motion correction? If so, then this program would surely be redundant for those users.

I guess what Iím saying is that except for specialist still life, I canít see the point of it... See, bear of simplistic brain! 🤪
It would be redundant I guess if LR can understand the native 144mg pixelshift file and yer not actually editing just a single frame but deriving the benefits of the 4 of them, but I don't know if that's the case.

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Ok. Have you tried PS2DNG with a file containing PS motion artifacts? The reason I uninstalled PS2DNG from my computer was that I saw no difference between SPD9 treating Pentax PS files and treating PS2DNG, without much information in PS2DNG documentation, I concluded that PS2DNG was more for Sony users since they have separate files and no a single DNG file like we have from Pentax.
What would be the benefit of PS2DNG for Pentax?
For Pentax it would allow for a super quick way for when working in controlled conditions (studio, product photography, still life) and instead of having to visit a Raw Developer like Raw Therapee to 'package them up' as a Tiff file for further editing, you can run this quick program, get a single DNG file and take that into LR ready to go.

If you have motion in your shot you would be better to visit RT no doubt.

My understanding (till now) was that NO program could handle Pixelshift files and derive the actual intended benefit other than DCU5/Silkypix or RawTherapee. When taking the native DNG (motion or not) and importing to LR/PS/Capture One etc, then its only the first frame it's utilising and thus losing the benefit.

As someone who uses RT for Pixelshift a lot, I can tell you that running PS2DNG and generating that single file was super fast in comparison. That and the fact the DNG ends up looking like my other DNG's when im about to begin the editing process vs using the Tiff file that RT gives (which has quite a different look), that I see as being beneficial.
04-12-2020, 06:36 AM   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
microlight's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 1,699
Eddy, my understanding was that Lr/ACR would originally only process the first of the four images, but that there was a relatively recent update that allowed the software to integrate all four. Thereís a big caveat however, because even now, DCU5 and RawTherapee are to my knowledge the only apps that will process pixel shift images, taking into account motion correction.

Can anyone help out an old guyís memory about when Lr/ACR pixel shift processing changed?

04-12-2020, 06:56 AM - 1 Like   #20
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,665
Lightroom failed two times and got fixed two times. First fail happened at the release of K-1 MK1 and 2nd at the release of MK2.

Lightroom still cannot handle motion is PS image but othwerwise it is my primary PS processing platform. Sometimes I mask in extra details to non-PS image, sometimes if time allows I spend some more time with RT.
04-12-2020, 07:28 AM   #21
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,456
Nice! PS2DNG certainly looks like it is doing something to squish the files together.

One night-and-day difference between pixelshift and non-pixelshift images is the grain structure at high ISO (e.g., 25,600 and above). The "grains" of noise in a high-ISO pixelshift image are half the width (1/4 the area) of those in a non-pixelshift image of the same high ISO.

Another big difference occurs when shooting very detailed black-and-white subjects (e.g., a printed page of text shot at a distance with a very sharp lens). The non-pixelshift image will tend to have color artifacts from demosaicing. The pixelshift image will not only be much sharper but it will show no color artifacts at all.
04-12-2020, 09:22 AM - 1 Like   #22
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,665
Pixel-Shift is superior in almost anything. Bayer infected cameras should not even exist today. Shame that Sigma decided to postpone their FF Foveon for now.

Best B&W results from PS file can be had with software handling RGB channels directly without too many mixer channels like in LR (not effective with PS). SilverEfex works very very well here.
04-12-2020, 09:46 AM   #23
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,456
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Pixel-Shift is superior in almost anything. Bayer infected cameras should not even exist today. Shame that Sigma decided to postpone their FF Foveon for now.

Best B&W results from PS file can be had with software handling RGB channels directly without too many mixer channels like in LR (not effective with PS). SilverEfex works very very well here.
Bayer does suck. But Foveon has a serious problem with how it separates color. The physics of how much R, G, and B wavelengths of light end up in the R, G, and B regions in the sensor create relatively poor color separation at the sensor data level. The math for getting good RGB from the Foveon sensor amplifies the noise a lot and reduces the camera's DR at base ISO to only about 8 or 10 stops for color images. For B/W, Foveon would be great because B/W really does need all pixels to record all colors and the processing for B/W tends to average the RGB channels together which reduces the noise.

04-12-2020, 10:40 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,196
Rawtherapee can run headless from the command line using the rawtherapee-cli binary. I'd be very surprised if there aren't tools freely available on mac that allows you to create a drop target (for drag and drop) that will run a predefined rawtherapee pp3 profile and spit out a 16 bit tiff for further editing no further clicking required. Perhaps applescript?

If you set up dynamic profiles in rawtherapee you can have your demosaiced motion corrected tiffs without any manual intervention except pushing the files into the queue. My suggestion is to apply the dcp profiles from Adobe under colour management if you wish to match the adobe look.

The file format is a red herring. A demosaiced DNG is no longer a raw file and probably just a TIFF in a DNG container. How adobe handles applying colour profiles etc are a black box and appears to be outside user control to a large extent. So coaxing it into producing identical results for TIFF and DNG might be non trivial but i suspect you need to inject some of the metadata from a 'normal' DNG.
04-12-2020, 11:05 AM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,914
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Pixel-Shift is superior in almost anything.
Except multi-shot technique is usable 5%? 10%? of situations?
04-12-2020, 11:28 AM   #26
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 37,970
QuoteOriginally posted by BruceBanner Quote
It would be redundant I guess if LR can understand the native 144mg pixelshift file and yer not actually editing just a single frame but deriving the benefits of the 4 of them, but I don't know if that's the case.
The more recent versions of LR are able to process all four images, but the results are inferior to what may be done with other tools. The fallback has been to process to 16-bit TIFF using PDCU* and then PP using one's tool of choice using the TIFF.


Steve

* dcrawps is another possible choice and one that might be preferred in that it supports generation of a so-called linear TIFF with no applied color profiles.
04-12-2020, 11:33 AM   #27
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 37,970
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Best B&W results from PS file can be had with software handling RGB channels directly without too many mixer channels like in LR (not effective with PS). SilverEfex works very very well here.
Could you elaborate? I have long felt that it may be possible to do a dedicated monochrome merge from a pixel shift capture with superior tonality.


Steve
04-12-2020, 12:17 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,196
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Except multi-shot technique is usable 5%? 10%? of situations?
For news photographer probably less, it's even worse for a street photographer. I think you are overestimating your figures.
Unless that is we take still lifes, product photography or architecture photography into account... That was a long winded way of saying your figures are meaningless and will vary hugely from 0% to 100% depending on the photographer.
04-12-2020, 01:02 PM   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 22,599
I like Raw Therapee enough that it isn't a problem to use it to motion correct and then do any aggressive editing with a TIFF file created from it. The only issue I see is that I don't always seem able to get highlight recovery as much with RT as with Lightroom. Much of this is probably due to my familiarity with RT, but I seem to get hard edges on areas where highlights are blown or almost blown quicker than in Lightroom. But I don't know that this program would help there.
04-12-2020, 01:16 PM   #30
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,665
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Could you elaborate? I have long felt that it may be possible to do a dedicated monochrome merge from a pixel shift capture with superior tonality.
First I convert the PS file to TIFF and then I use SilverEfex plugin to convert the RGB-image to B&W which produces cleaner output than I can achieve with Photoshop (or Lightroom channel mixer). Both approaches are better than non-PS B&W conversion which is prone to artifacting with more radical channel mixing which does not usually happen with PS file at all.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
benefit, correction, dcraw, dng, files, frame, frames, icon, image, images, lr, motion, pentax, photography, photoshop, pixel, pixelshift, pixelshift to dng/libraw, profile, rawtherapee, shift, shot, software, tiff, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Adobe DNG vs Pentax's DNG dflorez Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 8 12-07-2015 11:34 AM
Start the buisness, sole proprietorship or LLC ?? ChallengedOne General Talk 4 04-23-2011 09:24 PM
Linux -- Ubuntu Karmic 9.10, libraw 0.8.5, Raw file processing K7er Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 4 01-13-2010 08:35 PM
DNG in-camera vs DNG from Lightroom? rfortson Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 9 11-02-2008 11:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:48 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top