[BarryE]

No point in buying a silly, high res camera when you've got this new feature in ACR 13.2

The feature does on first test give impressive results. Converting K-1 images to 144MP takes a few moments and the RAW processing potential is still there and artifacts are off-the-scale better than bicubic in PS.

Very impressive. Who needs a 645Z or Sony A1 or Canon R5 and 50 or so MP ...?

---

Last edited by BarryE; 03-15-2021 at 03:18 PM.

[Gutta Perka]

No point in buying a silly, high res camera when you've got this new feature in ACR 13.2

The feature does on first test give impressive results. Converting K-1 images to 144MP takes a few moments and the RAW processing potential is still there and artifacts are off-the-scale better than bicubic in PS.

Very impressive. Who needs a 645Z ?

And my phone becomes a K-1?

[Kobayashi.K]

If you feel comfortable being locked in by Adobe go ahead. I still prefer my OM EM1X, 20 Mp native, 25 or 50 Mp hand-held pixel shift, 80 Mp pixel-shift on tripod. Not only this, lots of fun generally with this camera.

[JohnMc]

And my phone becomes a K-1?

Get the new Xiaomi 150MP Camera Phone and have a blast!

[aaacb]

Come to think of it, you can have images generated from as little as a few words, who needs a camera at all

[disconnekt]

Get the new Xiaomi 150MP Camera Phone and have a blast!

Or you can go to the chonky side of things and get the PhaseOne XF IQ4 150MP camera 😂

[mtl_pentaxian]

No point in buying a silly, high res camera when you've got this new feature in ACR 13.2

The feature does on first test give impressive results. Converting K-1 images to 144MP takes a few moments and the RAW processing potential is still there and artifacts are off-the-scale better than bicubic in PS.

Very impressive. Who needs a 645Z or Sony A1 or Canon R5 and 50 or so MP ...?

I’ve run a few tests with some 16 Mp files from my K-5 and the resulting 64 Mp DNG files that ACR creates are very impressive.

[DonV]

Seems to me the "laws of physics" would prevent creating more pixels out of fewer?
What am I missing?

[stevebrot]

Seems to me the "laws of physics" would prevent creating more pixels out of fewer?
What am I missing?

No laws of physics are being broken. With a few lines of code, I can create as many pixels as I like, though they would be pure artifice in much the same sense as the additional pixels from upsampling.


Steve

[Oldbayrunner]

This is fine for upping the resolutions for older raw photos but for K1 dng's one photo can take a very long time to process. depending on your processor & memory capacity. A 16mp photo taken with my old K5iis took on my very adequate computer 5 minutes to complete. Not worth it unless one is trying to billboard size photos..

[BarryE]

This is fine for upping the resolutions for older raw photos but for K1 dng's one photo can take a very long time to process. depending on your processor & memory capacity. A 16mp photo taken with my old K5iis took on my very adequate computer 5 minutes to complete. Not worth it unless one is trying to billboard size photos..

Just timed a K-1 enhance and it took 83 seconds on an ancient 5 year old laptop with barely 2GB of memory left to do its processing. I'll try it on my desktop later where it will be a lot quicker to create a 144MP image.

[Oldbayrunner]

Just timed a K-1 enhance and it took 83 seconds on an ancient 5 year old laptop with barely 2GB of memory left to do its processing. I'll try it on my desktop later where it will be a lot quicker to create a 144MP image.

I'm using a newer I7 quad core processor with 128mb of ram, a 4K capable video card and a 16mp dng file took over 5 minutes to enhance in acr. Now where this does pay off is either older lower mb photos or heavily cropped photos in ACR to bring back up the resolution so I am finding in my playing with it so far.

Edit: took a K1 the same unedited DNG file and enhanced it in Lightroom Classic acr, it took 2 min to process.

The latest Lightroom Classic version created a 7360 x 4912 (Same size as original) 145.60 MB file from a 36mb size where as the latest Photoshop CC Acr created a 14720 X 9820 447.60 MB file. So looks like processing time depends on what size file the program is creating and for some reason the enhanced in Lightroom didn't increase the MP dimension. Both programs were updated this am along with ACR 13.2

I tried this with 3 different photos with the same result. Seems like it really is only working as it should currently in Photoshop ACR.

So you may want to check your picture dimensions on that rapid enhancement to see if it actually increased the resolution.

[ffking]

Just because I'm ignorant, what's the difference to old interpolation software - the original of the print here was taken on a 10Mp APS-C K-10D, and the print they got out of it is - well, you can see, even in spite of the cheapo happy-snap used to take this...

[MossyRocks]

Seems to me the "laws of physics" would prevent creating more pixels out of fewer?
What am I missing?

Interpolation is just a fancy word for made up and there are tools that have been doing similar, possibly better, jobs of interpolation for years. A couple that come to mind are the freeware A Sharper Scaling, and Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI

Personally I would love to see a comparison of various upscaling methods using different programs. A good test would be to start with a pixel shift image with tons of detail. Then show a 100% crop of that and upscale it with the standard photoshop/GIMP methods (photoshop has preserve details Gimp has lanczos so both should be tested), the new super resolution feature in ACR/Lightroom, the use of the freeware tool A Sharper Scaling, the use of Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI. Scale the 100% crop up 200% with each method so we can see the results. I would do it myself but I run Linux with a windows 7 VM and don't have Lightroom, Photoshop, or Gigapixel AI so I can't do it but would love to see a good comprehensive test like that.

[DonV]

Interpolation is just a fancy word for made up and there are tools that have been doing similar, possibly better, jobs of interpolation for years. A couple that come to mind are the freeware A Sharper Scaling, and Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI

Personally I would love to see a comparison of various upscaling methods using different programs. A good test would be to start with a pixel shift image with tons of detail. Then show a 100% crop of that and upscale it with the standard photoshop/GIMP methods (photoshop has preserve details Gimp has lanczos so both should be tested), the new super resolution feature in ACR/Lightroom, the use of the freeware tool A Sharper Scaling, the use of Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI. Scale the 100% crop up 200% with each method so we can see the results. I would do it myself but I run Linux with a windows 7 VM and don't have Lightroom, Photoshop, or Gigapixel AI so I can't do it but would love to see a good comprehensive test like that.

Interpolation is just a fancy word for made up and there are tools that have been doing similar, possibly better, jobs of interpolation for years.

That is what I figured, not really creating but "sub-dividing" ?