Re: One for Pixel-Peepers
xpatUSA wrote:
tagscuderia wrote:
xpatUSA wrote:
Iconoscope wrote:
A fully automated software routine to combine the images would make this scheme more attractive!
Indeed it would! Doing it all "by hand" is quite tedious. Quite a learning curve too, especially if using several apps for the various stages of the procedure.
P.S. this multi-shot "Super Resolution" trick is primarily aimed at mitigating the CFA.
Are you sure?
Hmm...
I thought that was by moving the sensor by one pixel thereby getting 3 colors measured ar one location - whereas super-resolution involves fractional movements.
As I'm sure that you're aware, the Olympus Pixel Shift routine utilises 8 shots: 4 shifted by 1 pixel to mitigate the CFA, and then ½ pixel increments to boost spatial resolution. I first read about "superresolution" from Photo Acute so I thought that I'd re-read it's FAQ page and... I think that there are greater gains to be had for a CFA image; in part also because it reduces moire. But I guess that my original comment is wide of the mark.
Back when I was using an E-410, I wrote a command line tool ...
Windows "cmd" or a shell script?
cmd, used to use the command line a lot on Windows, macOS has turned me into a GUI slave.
... that:
- upscaled (Bicubic to avoid aliasing, cannot recall the percentage)
- aligned the images
- averaged by mean
- downscaled (Lanczos 3)
Cool.
From memory, the alignment tool was critical, I'll post if I remember it.
I would then manually sharpen using RL-D. So my final files were no larger, but the acuity was vastly improved despite only using 6 shots; that was the E-410's buffer before FPS dropped.
"RL-D" ... RawTherapee has it
With Foveon, we already have that per-pixel acuity so the only worthwhile gains would be noise related at which point a Median image stack is probably superior?
For noise, that should be true.
But at least this technique doesn't need a tripod, as mine doesn't get out muchÂ
Interesting though!
My main interest in stacking is for the occasional focus job; much less for HDR (curves do well enough for that!).