I think for the purpose of making the image sharper, you may try just upscale it by 2x. Other than the very steep price in the processing time, this might work as an alternative to deconvolution, which I have never liked. However, it does make whatever already there look sharper. It doesn’t create things that did not exist in the original image, so it can’t replace a real image with higher resolution. I am thinking the only way to share a full image at 6x is through the gigapan uploader.Įdited by calypsob, 17 August 2018 - 09:56 PM. Wei Hao I would be curious to see what this does with your D800 or 645. Its so big that camera raw will not open the file for editing. Interestingly the upsampled 6x canvas size in PS is 425.5 inches x 284.16 in other words 35 feet x 24 feet. I think my guiding quality is alot more apparent at this resolution, I guess I should autoguide if I plan to seriously upsample in the future. It definitely made some of the small fainter stars brighter as well. I zoomed in quite a bit in photoshop and the difference is apparent in each image, at 6x there seems to be some artifact but it also rounded off the stars. I finally got the 6x to work but its too big to upload to flickr. I was using the zoom tool in flickr during image preview but that was not enough zoom. LOL I should have thought about that from the start. It will take lot of computation and you won't see the difference over the whole image. For testing and demonstrating the effectiveness of this program, there is no point running it over a full image.
Upsampling only makes sense if you intend to look at the image at the pixel level, such as viewing the original at at least 4x enlargement on your monitor. I think you should just crop a 200x200 image and let this program to enlarge it to 1000x1000.
0 kommentar(er)
