Makten Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · NO FLAME INTENDED! anyone use just LR to process their RAF files? | |
gdanmitchell wrote:
"Are the worms in the room with us now, Makten?" ;-)
That is at... 400% magnification... and fine details are beyond the ability of the sensor/lens resolution at that level in these conditions, which I used because they are a worst case for potential worms.
Take a look at the 100% crop below it.
- - -
Going to try this one more time, since some are absolutely devoted to the worms thing.
First, to those pointing out that 400% magnification crops don't look like prints, thanks for that. ;-)
(This is, after all, a 24MP APS-C sensor camera, and not what I usually use for this kind of subject.)
A photograph with high "worms" potential. XPro2 24MP raw file converted in ACR and post processed in Photoshop. Here is a small version of the image prepared for the web.
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/NaturalWorld/TheLandscape/California/SierraNevada/EasternSierra/Color/PeelerLakeReflectedMountainSlopes20170806.jpg
- - - - -
Here is a 1500 x 1500 pixel crop from the original full size file, exported to jpg from photoshop without interpolation, with the area from off-center towards the upper right area in order to include material that would tend to reveal the worms effect.
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/1500PixelSquare300ppiOriginal.jpg
- - - - -
Next, a 400% magnification crop screenshot of a smaller area from within the above crop with ACR sharpening turned off (set to zero amount. Image size 2352 × 1950 pixels.
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/ACRNoSharpening400Percent%20copy.jpg
Looks crappy, as we would expect a raw image at 400% magnification crop to look with no sharpening.
- - - - -
Now let's see how sharpening settings affect this:
Screenshot of raw file in ACR at 400% magnification. 2352 . 1950 pixels.
Sharpening settings:
Amount: 40
Radius: .5
Details: 10
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/ACSharpenAmt40Radpt5Det10at400Percent%20copy.jpg
At 400% magnification lots of flaws appear and the image will not be sharp. (If you print and work at large sizes and high magnifications, you know this.) In my workflow an additional sharpening operation would be applied once the file was in Photoshop using a high amount and small radius. In any case, there is no real worms issue here.
- - - - -
So let's play with the boundaries a bit. I'll up the details setting to 50.
Screenshot of raw file in ACR at 400% magnification. 2352 . 1950 pixels.
Sharpening settings:
Amount: 40
Radius: .5
Details: 50
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/ACSharpenAmt40Radpt5Det50at400Percent%20copy.jpg
If I look carefully I can start to see some "worms" effects in a few locations in the image. For example, look at bright areas in where the rocks are a bit darker in shadows, and in a slightly "swirly" are just right of center where rocks are in the sun. So, with amount at 50, if we look closely (400% magnification!) we can start to see evidence of worms... that you'll never see in a print.
- - - - -
But let's keep going. Here I'll continue to increase the amount value up to 75, but drop details back to 0.
Screenshot of raw file in ACR at 400% magnification. 2352 . 1950 pixels.
Sharpening settings:
Amount: 75
Radius: .5
Details: 0
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/ACSharpenAmt75Radpt5Det0at400Percent%20copy.jpg
With this higher amount setting (higher than I would use) and no details, the slight "worminess" in the previous example goes away.
- - - - -
So, let's crank up the details slider, too, and see what happens. (I don't think I have ever actually used this combination of high amount and details settings in a real world situation.)
Screenshot of raw file in ACR at 400% magnification. 2352 . 1950 pixels.
Sharpening settings:
Amount: 75
Radius: .5
Details: 75
https://gallery.gdanmitchell.com/gallery/var/albums/HumanWorld/Unclassified/Fujifilm-x-trans-images/ACSharpenAmt75Radpt5Det50at400Percent%20copy.jpg
Why, look, worms out the proverbial wazoo!
So, what is the general approach to worm-free x-trans images from raw? Generally, use a small radius (I like .5) a reasonable amount (a bit higher than you might use with a larger radius), and minimal details (I typically keep it between 0 and 25).
Or get a XT5 or XH2, where the sensor seems to be almost immune to the effect. (To get it with the 40MP sensor I have to use really outrageously high settings.)
I know some readers will still persist with the oh-so-fun worms meme, but I hope that at least a few of you start to see the relationship between the details setting and worms.
Dan
...Show more →
All of those crops have worms too. It's pretty clear now that you don't understand the issue (lucky you).
I also don't care what magnification you think the crops are; I can easily compare them to the whole image and see that the magnification isn't larger than that it would show when magnifying and looking around in an image. Which I do all the time.
Edit: And I don't care one bit about how it looks in print, because I don't print.
Not saying the results are useless. Only that I personally would not accept it, when there are cameras without that stupid x-trans CFA.
|