How to make a high-resolution image with the OM-1

[peterwgallagher]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

 

[Dakotan]

...when you upscale your lower DR and noisier 20mp orf vs shooting hi-res. DXO Photolab sharpens E-M5II and E-M1III hi-res images WONDERFULLY with none of the artifacts you wrote about. They will def have OM-1 support.

I think you're using the wrong tools to fix your problem.

 

[SrMi]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

 

[Painter19]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

 

[Regor250]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

 

[SrMi]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

For me, it is better IQ: less noise, less aliasing.

 

[Painter19]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

Good question. The higher resolution can offer a great number of useable crops, assuming the sharpness is there. In the case of the computational high-res modes like that used on the OM-1 there is evidently also a gain in dynamic range, and less noise. Some pixel shift high-res mode cameras also claim improved color in their high res images. I’ve downloaded the raw fie from maybe 10 high res OM-1 landscapes shots. I didn't see noticeable smearing of detail. They looked sharp to me. They were from both third-party review sites, and the manufacturer’s sites. I’ll confess to wondering/hoping whether a higher resolution landscape photo that doesn’t come at the expense of dynamic range or noise (like in the case of those from a sensor over crammed with sensor sites) might a least in some cases derive a certain power or presence from that resolution? Just a hope and a prayer perhaps?

 

[Painter19]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

For me, it is better IQ: less noise, less aliasing.

I assume you’re referring to computational pixel-shift high-res images? Can you please tell me what camera you’re using?, and whether you are seeing a smearing of detail in those high-res images?

 

[John Mason]

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

I like that I can have basically noise free images to iso 3200 with great dynamic range. For landscapes that gives me flexibility to stop down to get a great hyper-focal front back clear focus without sacrificing shutter speed. Here's one with the Em1x I did with the 12-40 f2.8. I'm now shooting with the Om1 and it's about 3x faster with less (and there were not many) artifacts. Also since you are getting mutiple sensor colors over each pixel you end up getting no false color in textured objects. Basically, I love HHHR mode for landscapes.

--
John Mason - Battle Ground, Indiana USA

 

[Bobapingu]

Unless I've misunderstood, there has been no mention here of processing HR ORFs in OM Workspace. In one of my trials, WS seemed to extract more detail form a HR shot than LR. This would not surprise me. I would expect not all pixel shift algorithms and subsequent demosaicing algorithms are the same. Any thoughts?

 

[Bobapingu]

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

I like that I can have basically noise free images to iso 3200 with great dynamic range. For landscapes that gives me flexibility to stop down to get a great hyper-focal front back clear focus without sacrificing shutter speed. Here's one with the Em1x I did with the 12-40 f2.8. I'm now shooting with the Om1 and it's about 3x faster with less (and there were not many) artifacts. Also since you are getting mutiple sensor colors over each pixel you end up getting no false color in textured objects. Basically, I love HHHR mode for landscapes.

A lovely shot. Yes, the 12-40 f2.8 is ridiculously sharp, even better on a tripod.

 

[Painter19]

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

I like that I can have basically noise free images to iso 3200 with great dynamic range. For landscapes that gives me flexibility to stop down to get a great hyper-focal front back clear focus without sacrificing shutter speed. Here's one with the Em1x I did with the 12-40 f2.8. I'm now shooting with the Om1 and it's about 3x faster with less (and there were not many) artifacts. Also since you are getting mutiple sensor colors over each pixel you end up getting no false color in textured objects. Basically, I love HHHR mode for landscapes.

Thank you, John for the image and the info. That’s great that the OM-1 is that much faster. Your point about being able to stop down more with the OM-1 for better depth of field is a good one. I hadn’t thought about that. Good to hear there aren’t many artifacts with high-res. Are you mainly shooting in high-res hand-held mode?

I’m thinking if I go for the OM-1 / 12-40mm f2.8 pro lens bundle for $2,700, and then maybe pick up a used 12-100mm f4 pro lens for maybe $ 900, and the external charger and spare battery for $200.- (that one bothers me) that will come to $3,800. I’ve also been looking at Fujifilm GFX 50S II which bundled with their 35-70mm f4-f5.6 lens comes in at $4K. It’s a 50+ MP sensor and has a (tripod) high-res mode. I’m planning to take my time and am open to other alternatives, but landscape photography is my passion.

 

[SrMi]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

For me, it is better IQ: less noise, less aliasing.

I assume you’re referring to computational pixel-shift high-res images? Can you please tell me what camera you’re using?, and whether you are seeing a smearing of detail in those high-res images?

Yes, I mainly use HHHR with Olympus M1m3 or OM-1. There is no smearing of detail. There can be motion artifacts.

 

[Painter19]

Unless I've misunderstood, there has been no mention here of processing HR ORFs in OM Workspace. In one of my trials, WS seemed to extract more detail form a HR shot than LR. This would not surprise me. I would expect not all pixel shift algorithms and subsequent demosaicing algorithms are the same. Any thoughts?

My only thought is to try out the Om Workspace if i purchase an OM-1 . I normally use Adobe Raw and PS. Thanks for the research and the info. Definitely worth checking out.

 

[Painter19]

I previously used the OM-D EM-1 in the Mark II and Mark III variants. So I was a bit sceptical of the OM Systems claims about Hi-Res mode on the latest camera. Still, hi-resolution is not important to me: I have never found any circumstances where it was necessary for my printed or digital photo output.

After a couple of weeks' use in the field (Tasmanian wilderness) and in tests (the neighbours' brick-wall) I have found the accessibility of the new implementation -- using the 'movie' button and the back dial to choose between Hi-Res modes -- is certainly an improvement. The accuracy/acuity of the results both hand-held and on a tripod are also a little improved.

But the images, whether hand-held or on a tripod, are still not nearly as sharp as normal resolution OM-1 images (the Hi-Res JPEGs OOC are almost as sharp as the regular JPEGs but much less flexible than the RAWs). High frequency areas of landscape images, in particular, can end up looking splotchy in Hi-Res images at full size (as if the details had been rendered with a fine trowel rather than a fine brush).

I've tried various ways to fix this including of course LR sharpening and texture controls (that make some but not much difference).

The most successful sharpening tool that I have found is Topaz "AI" sharpening. It produces a result (using the 'very blurry') setting that is nearly as sharp as the normal-res OM-1 raw image. I have also used FocusMagic in PShop with some improvement but not as much as the Topaz product.

De-mosaicing using the Iridient O-Transformer improves the underlying raw so that LR sharpening and texture controls produce a somewhat better result. I suspect DXO PhotoLab -- when eventually it supports the camera -- will do so too.

But by FAR the best approach I have found is to take a normal-res OM-1 image and upscale it using LR 'Enhance'. This produces an equivalent size RAW image with MUCH better tone, acuity and texture than any of the Hi-Res variants or processing. In fact LR 'enhanced' high-resolution images are easier/quicker to make and equally acute as the OM 'normal resolution' images.

PWG

Pixel-shift images require more sharpening than regular images. Previously, I used to demosaic with O-Transformer, but now I run Topaz Sharpen AI instead.

Pixel-shift is less about increased resolution than reduced noise (more DR) and aliasing (less false colors). If there are no motion artifacts, pixel-shift will produce images with higher image quality.

The convenience of HHHR mode in OM-1 makes me use it whenever motion artifacts cannot be an issue.

It’s been 4 mos. since the last post in this thread. I’m wondering what the consensus is now about the OM-1 high -res modes? I’ve been considering an OM-1 for landscape photography with the idea of using the high-res modes. My subjects will generally be quite still so i don’t see moving objects as much of a concern. I’m hoping to use hand held high -res quite a bit.The alternative for me would be to go for an APS-C sensor camera , or even full frame, but then there is the greater size and cost of the lenses. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Just curious to know what you do with your images that require high resolution? I find it interesting but honestly I am struggling to find a need for it when it comes to landscapes.

For me, it is better IQ: less noise, less aliasing.

I assume you’re referring to computational pixel-shift high-res images? Can you please tell me what camera you’re using?, and whether you are seeing a smearing of detail in those high-res images?

Yes, I mainly use HHHR with Olympus M1m3 or OM-1. There is no smearing of detail. There can be motion artifacts.

Good to know. Thanks!

 

[SrMi]

Yes, I mainly use HHHR with Olympus M1m3 or OM-1. There is no smearing of detail. There can be motion artifacts.

Good to know. Thanks!

One thing to note: Olympus HR images often need more sharpening than standard files, but they can also handle more aggressive sharpening. I use Topaz Sharpen AI when required.

 

[Painter19]

Yes, I mainly use HHHR with Olympus M1m3 or OM-1. There is no smearing of detail. There can be motion artifacts.

Good to know. Thanks!

One thing to note: Olympus HR images often need more sharpening than standard files, but they can also handle more aggressive sharpening. I use Topaz Sharpen AI when required.

Okay, thanks. I normally don’t do any sharpening of my non- high-res raw files. I haven’t shot with a pixel shift high res camera yet. I’ll keep what you say in mind when I do.

 

[Mait]

Unless I've misunderstood, there has been no mention here of processing HR ORFs in OM Workspace. In one of my trials, WS seemed to extract more detail form a HR shot than LR. This would not surprise me. I would expect not all pixel shift algorithms and subsequent demosaicing algorithms are the same. Any thoughts?

The bad part is that OM workspace cant export to DNG, TIFF is the best option for further processing ?

 

[john Clinch]

Some times I wish I had a huge high resolution file of a landscape to go on the wall at home

If I ever need a high resolution landscape my approach would be to use a relatively short focal length and then take multiple over overlapping shots and then stitch them together

 

[Painter19]

Some times I wish I had a huge high resolution file of a landscape to go on the wall at home

If I ever need a high resolution landscape my approach would be to use a relatively short focal length and then take multiple over overlapping shots and then stitch them together

I’ve done a fair amount of that, but t’s been a few years. It works well, but takes some time and work to get right. The stitching applications may have improved in the 5 yrs. since I last stitched large composites?