First nine days with R6II

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Canon_Guy wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

I've been playing around with my screen resolution, and it's set at the next to the lowest image size setting (so next to highest resolution).

OK, so we are at home now :-). You do use downscaling and that most probably causes the problem. Because your computer is not showing you 1:1 image but is downscaling it to a lower resolution. And this downscaling algorythm somehow works with sharpness and details.

The only correct way is to go with the native resolution. So set the monitor to 2560x1440 and forget :-).

If I increase the image size, by making the monitor, which has a 2560 X 1440 max resolution, behave like a 1920 X 1080 monitor,

No, never use other than native resolution.

I can see the diagonals at 100%, just about when looking quite close. I'm talking about the image of the cat with his tongue out, looking at his whiskers. I tried a couple of different resize methods, and I think the bilinear method on PL6 gives slightly smoother results than the default, which is bicubic sharper. I also processed the image without resizing, and don't see the diagonals on that one. Here's the non-resized image (it is cropped a bit):

This one below (the original) looks very fine.

And here's the original version I posted, which is bicubic sharper resized to 2000 pixels on the longer side:

And here comes the issue. The original image is already sharpened. Now after downsizing it you sharpen it for the 2nd time. Which should not be done. The correct workflow for the best control over sharpening (and its artifacts) is to have the original not sharpened at all. Then downsize it to the desired size and apply sharpening corresponding to the target resolution.

Bicubic sharper tends to be too aggresive, which is somehow confirmed here.

And here's the same one, resized with bilinear:

This one not too bad.

I can't see how that looks at 100% until I post this, and then look at the images on DPR's site. So I'll come back in a minute.

I've just had a look at 100%, and I can definitely see a difference between the original bicubic sharper resize and the bicubic linear resize. If I set my monitor to behave like a 1920 X 1080 monitor, I can see some diagonals at 100%, more so on the bicubic sharper version, but not on the original (non-resized) size version. At the default resolution, which is 2240 X 1260, I don't see them, and not at the monitor's maximum resolution either. It looks like some resolution settings are showing the images at 100% as if they were really more like 150% or 200%. It also looks like the resizing algorithm is what is introducing the diagonals, which are only visible at certain screen resolutions, at least on my iMac.

Most probably. So leave the native and that is the best you can do for fidelity of what you see.

So you think I should also not resize pictures for web viewing? The files can be quite unwieldy at original resolution.

Native monitor resolution (2560x1440). Not native photos resolution .

See ya