SPP @ 2X

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
dmaclau
Senior MemberPosts: 1,527Gear list
Like?
SPP @ 2X
7 months ago

I had always thought that SPP had some "secret sauce" for saving images at 2X.  Something on another post though made me wonder.  Does anyone know how they save at 2x resolution?  Is it the same process or processes as other resizing software?

 dmaclau's gear list:dmaclau's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-M1 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 21,063Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to dmaclau, 7 months ago

dmaclau wrote:

I had always thought that SPP had some "secret sauce" for saving images at 2X. Something on another post though made me wonder. Does anyone know how they save at 2x resolution? Is it the same process or processes as other resizing software?

Saving as JPEG and then resizing that JPEG 2x to another JPEG in post processing is not a good idea. I would not recommend that.

But - as far as I have heard - the in camera 2x resize JPEG is not better than doing 2x resize from RAW in post processing.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmaclau
Senior MemberPosts: 1,527Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 7 months ago

I'm not sure I understand.

I seldom use the 2X feature in SPP but have played with it for certain images.  For those images I would often prefer a somewhat smaller magnification level, 1.5 for example.  This leads me to wonder if I save a normal size Tiff from SPP and then use a 3rd party software, like onOne's Perfect resize how it would compare to the SPP resize.

 dmaclau's gear list:dmaclau's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-M1 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
maceoQ
Contributing MemberPosts: 736
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to dmaclau, 7 months ago

dmaclau wrote:

This leads me to wonder if I save a normal size Tiff from SPP and then use a 3rd party software, like onOne's Perfect resize how it would compare to the SPP resize.

There is nothing special about double size SPP output. I get the best results with photozoom pro, followed by perfect resize. SPP double size is more or less comparable to normal photoshop resize algorithms.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 21,063Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to maceoQ, 7 months ago

maceoQ wrote:

dmaclau wrote:

This leads me to wonder if I save a normal size Tiff from SPP and then use a 3rd party software, like onOne's Perfect resize how it would compare to the SPP resize.

There is nothing special about double size SPP output. I get the best results with photozoom pro, followed by perfect resize. SPP double size is more or less comparable to normal photoshop resize algorithms.

That is what I have heard also.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmaclau
Senior MemberPosts: 1,527Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to maceoQ, 7 months ago
 dmaclau's gear list:dmaclau's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-M1 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner
Forum ProPosts: 18,633Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to dmaclau, 7 months ago

dmaclau wrote:

I had always thought that SPP had some "secret sauce" for saving images at 2X. Something on another post though made me wonder. Does anyone know how they save at 2x resolution? Is it the same process or processes as other resizing software?

In theory you would think it could possibly be better, by doing some sharpening after resize or using an algorithm tailored to X3F data...

But in previous tests, it didn't seem much different than bicubic sharper.

And that in turn, is not really much better than letting a printer (or printing service) upscale an image.

If you are super-serious about upscaling I'd get one of the recommended upscaling applications like Perfect Resize, or others mentioned on the forum... I forget which one everyone liked a lot.

Of note is that Rick was doing a lot of 30x40" prints just from the original size SPP JPG files and they looked really good in terms of detail, even up close.

 Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list:Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmaclau
Senior MemberPosts: 1,527Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Kendall Helmstetter Gelner, 7 months ago

Thanks Kendall.  I have always been impressed with the image sizes I can pull from the Sigma cameras.

I use Perfect Resize.  I'm really impressed with it's Tiling feature' it's a great help in setting up for prints.

I hadn't really explored upsizing images before but the capabilities of this merrill chip have me on a "mission for detail," so I'm experimenting.

 dmaclau's gear list:dmaclau's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-M1 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ChristianHass
Senior MemberPosts: 1,938Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to dmaclau, 7 months ago

dmaclau wrote:

I'm not sure I understand.

I seldom use the 2X feature in SPP but have played with it for certain images. For those images I would often prefer a somewhat smaller magnification level, 1.5 for example. This leads me to wonder if I save a normal size Tiff from SPP and then use a 3rd party software, like onOne's Perfect resize how it would compare to the SPP resize.

Sounds like Sigma agrees with you. The Quattros are getting a 1.4x jpeg mode so it's probably a safe bet that the new SPP version will have that as an output option as well.

-- hide signature --
 ChristianHass's gear list:ChristianHass's gear list
Ricoh GR Sony RX100 II Sony a6000 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sony E 20mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rick decker
Forum ProPosts: 12,168
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to dmaclau, 7 months ago

I am using photozoom also.  I compared it to SPP, bicubic and stair interpolation and photozomm appeared to be the best.  However, as per a comment by Kendall, I cropped a Merrill image and printed it at 32x48 at 94dpi and at 300 dpi.  It was a very sharp flower shot by the 1770C.  I don't think you could tell the difference.  So for large prints, upsizing is questionable.  I used bicubic smoother.  If you have a decent printer you ca do it  yourself.  The size of the crop was about 5x8 and again the size of the full image was 32x48.  I have done other tests at 180 vs 300 and the results are similar.

Rick

-- hide signature --

http://www.rickdecker.photography
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 21,063Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Kendall Helmstetter Gelner, 7 months ago

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner wrote:
If you are super-serious about upscaling I'd get one of the recommended upscaling applications like Perfect Resize, or others mentioned on the forum... I forget which one everyone liked a lot.

That might be Qimage or Genuine Fractals.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Scottelly
Senior MemberPosts: 2,496Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to rick decker, 7 months ago

rick decker wrote:

I am using photozoom also. I compared it to SPP, bicubic and stair interpolation and photozomm appeared to be the best. However, as per a comment by Kendall, I cropped a Merrill image and printed it at 32x48 at 94dpi and at 300 dpi. It was a very sharp flower shot by the 1770C. I don't think you could tell the difference. So for large prints, upsizing is questionable. I used bicubic smoother. If you have a decent printer you ca do it yourself. The size of the crop was about 5x8 and again the size of the full image was 32x48. I have done other tests at 180 vs 300 and the results are similar.

Rick

-- hide signature --

http://www.rickdecker.photography
http://www.silveroaksranch.com
http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker
Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Hey Rick, I tried PhotoZoom Pro 5 ( http://www.benvista.com/photozoompro ), and it looks like a spectacular resizing program. Here is a link to a gallery where you can see a variety of images that I resized. The last photos, of Biltmore mansion are the ones that I resized. The regular image is there too, for comparison. I tried resizing normally, with GIMP or Preview (the simple photo viewing program that comes with a Mac), if I remember correctly, and included that image for reference too. You should be able to tell what photos were done in PhotoZoom by the names.

http://ffphotos.zenfolio.com/sigmasd14

You can download those photos by clicking on a small one in the gallery and moving your mouse over the larger image. A MENU button pops up in the top left of the photo, and when you mouse over that you will see the option to download it in the drop-down menu.

WARNING: Some of these photos are more than 20 MB in size, because they have been upsized to very large sizes.

You can try PhotoZoom Pro 5 yourself. It is free to try. You will see that is how I did it, because there are watermarks on the images I upsized with my trial version.

Take particular notice of the angled edges on the roof of the mansion. They look SO much better in the photos resized with PhotoZoom.

Just so you are aware, the gallery is titled SD14, because those are all photos from an SD14, which produces either a 4.7 MP image (raw mode - sharpest photos) or a 14 MP image (special Super-HI mode - only JPEG photos in this mode). You can see by the huge images meant for printing at 40x60 inches that the resolution is far greater than a typical 4.7 MP photo from that camera! (The original image, which was edited and cropped, were 2,556 x 1,704 and the final upsized dimensions are 11,160 x 7,440.)

Here . . . I'll post them here for reference:

Edited and cropped image, up-sized using PhotoZoom Pro 5 (trial edition - notice the watermarks).

The following two photos are for reference.

Original, not resized, but slightly edited and cropped.

Upsized in a "normal" image editing program.

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sigma SD14 Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Scottelly
Senior MemberPosts: 2,496Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Scottelly, 7 months ago

Here's a comp. You really need to see it at full size to tell the difference. You'll need a pretty high resolution monitor. Try downloading it and viewing it full-screen or even at 100%.

Comp. showing the difference between resizing with a "regular" program vs. PhotoZoom Pro.

Remember the original photo is only 4.7 MP, a size that really NEEDS to be upsized for printing at huge sizes. In my opinion photos from the Merrill cameras really don't need to be upsized like this for printing . . . even at sizes like 40x60 inches. (I have to qualify that statement, because it's Laurence Matson and others who really know about such huge prints. I've never used a Merrill camera or even printed bigger than 20x30 inches.)

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sigma SD14 Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner
Forum ProPosts: 18,633Gear list
Like?
Update your database please...
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 7 months ago

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner wrote:
If you are super-serious about upscaling I'd get one of the recommended upscaling applications like Perfect Resize, or others mentioned on the forum... I forget which one everyone liked a lot.

That might be Qimage or Genuine Fractals.

Perfect Resize *is* Genuine Fractals... it was years ago they changed the name.

The other one I was thinking of is Photozoom Pro...

 Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list:Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Scottelly
Senior MemberPosts: 2,496Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Scottelly, 7 months ago

I just calculated the increase in pixels. The edited (including rotation and cropping) original image is about 4.4 MP, while the upsized image is about 83 MP. That sure is a MASSIVE difference in resolution! I don't think I'm likely to ever see a greater increase in resolution in my lifetime. lol

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sigma SD14 Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dmaclau
Senior MemberPosts: 1,527Gear list
Like?
Re: SPP @ 2X
In reply to Scottelly, 7 months ago

you sure you're not reading file size in MB?

 dmaclau's gear list:dmaclau's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm X-M1 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads