[MikeStnly]

So, I took this experimental shot of a perching bird using Pixel Shift on the K-3iii with a DA*300mm on a tripod and hand released the shutter. PS was set to Tripod (Motion Correction. On).



Does anyone else experiment with PS beyond the stationary subject mode?

---

Last edited by MikeStnly; 02-23-2022 at 12:16 PM. Reason: typo

[biz-engineer]

I'm using pixel shift quite often on moving subjects and I've had good results. It seem pixel shift improves colors on moving subjects.

[joelbolden]

I'm like b-z-engineer, I use my pixel shift(motion corr on) a lot as long as I can grab a steady support, which means often sitting on the ground and bracing on my knees. It does give greater resolution. I've also attempted it on BIF, and once in a while I'll get lucky there.

[Rondec]

Honestly, I don't think there is any value to using pixel shift for objects that have a lot of movement or doing it hand held. Motion correction can take care of artifacts, but all that motion correction does is mask out the pixel shifted areas using the first image (in Raw Therapee you can choose which of the four images is the base image).

I think it is useful to open your pixel shifted image in Raw Therapee and click the "show motion mask" button. If 90 or 95 percent of your image is green (has motion between the images) then it is simply best to choose the sharpest of the four and use it to develop things using that image. I am afraid that sometimes using pixel shift gives you the illusion of more detail, but the reality is it is simply placebo effect.

(I use pixel shift a lot, but there are many times where I don't bother it because there was too much wind/movement in a scene).

[acoufap]

Honestly, I don't think there is any value to using pixel shift for objects that have a lot of movement or doing it hand held. Motion correction can take care of artifacts, but all that motion correction does is mask out the pixel shifted areas using the first image (in Raw Therapee you can choose which of the four images is the base image).

I think it is useful to open your pixel shifted image in Raw Therapee and click the "show motion mask" button. If 90 or 95 percent of your image is green (has motion between the images) then it is simply best to choose the sharpest of the four and use it to develop things using that image. I am afraid that sometimes using pixel shift gives you the illusion of more detail, but the reality is it is simply placebo effect.

(I use pixel shift a lot, but there are many times where I don't bother it because there was too much wind/movement in a scene).

I think you are absolutely right. I had the same thoughts when I read this this initial post.

[biz-engineer]

Honestly, I don't think there is any value to using pixel shift for objects that have a lot of movement or doing it hand held.

Hand held , you are right.


For moving subjects, my opinion differs slightly, depending on shutter speeds.... Let's take a shutter speed 1/10 second at ISO100 (lowest noise, best DR), camera on tripod, the scene contains moving elements and non-moving elements (breeze blowing through tree leaves and branches, or a waterfall), other parts of the scene don't move (tree trunks, rocks). Even without pixel shift, the moving elements won't be sharp at 1/10th shutter speed and won't show aliasing/false colors at the pixel level (looking at it on XXL print), the resolution is lost from motion due to shutter speed , regardless what camera / sensor resolution is used. For other areas of the scene that don't move , PS will at least lower the noise if there is no image detail. So if the camera is solidly fixed on tripod, pixel shift can only improve the image once all moving parts are excluded, the only downside is memory usage and waiting for the buffer to clear after 4 exposure PS. If I am not in hurry, I will make 1 PS exposure because I can always use only one of the 4 frames if PS makes no difference. Pixel shift is free :-)

[Rondec]

Hand held , you are right.


For moving subjects, my opinion differs slightly, depending on shutter speeds.... Let's take a shutter speed 1/10 second at ISO100 (lowest noise, best DR), camera on tripod, the scene contains moving elements and non-moving elements (breeze blowing through tree leaves and branches, or a waterfall), other parts of the scene don't move (tree trunks, rocks). Even without pixel shift, the moving elements won't be sharp at 1/10th shutter speed and won't show aliasing/false colors at the pixel level (looking at it on XXL print), the resolution is lost from motion due to shutter speed , regardless what camera / sensor resolution is used. For other areas of the scene that don't move , PS will at least lower the noise if there is no image detail. So if the camera is solidly fixed on tripod, pixel shift can only improve the image once all moving parts are excluded, the only downside is memory usage and waiting for the buffer to clear after 4 exposure PS. If I am not in hurry, I will make 1 PS exposure because I can always use only one of the 4 frames if PS makes no difference. Pixel shift is free :-)

Sure. I use the motion mask to help me figure out whether there is value to developing an image as a pixel shift. Even if there is flowing water, you can use a median setting to get some extra blurring of the water, if you like that sort of thing.

I am often surprised at how little motion there is in a particular scene -- just some in the tops of trees and a little in grass in the foreground. As you say, there is no down side to shooting pixel shift and then grabbing the sharpest of the four images, if there is too much motion, but you can't create it after the fact if you don't shoot it that way.