Differences Between Multi-Shot and Adobe Enhance

[tedwill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I took two photos to test this theory.  Both taken with the SL2 and the 24-90 lens.

The first was a single shot of a house across a lake.

The second shot was taken using Multi-Shot.

Both shots were within 10 seconds of each other, so the light did not change.

When I first compared the two photos using Lightroom, the original single shot was 8368 x 5584.

The Multi-Shot was 16736 x 11168

When compared them side-by-side, there was considerably more sharpness in the image quality of the multi shot photo, as I expected. I could read the lettering on the side of a boat which I could not in the original single shot.

However, when I converted the single shot to an enhanced photo using Lightroom, it was difficult to tell the difference between the enhanced photo and the multi shot. Both had the same dimensions and from the looks of it, the same image quality.

Has anyone else tried this?  If this is in fact the case, rather than shooting multi shot, I will save space on my SD card and use my MacBook to enhance the photo rather than using my camera. But it seems to me the multi shot photos would be better since I am working with for photos instead of enhancing one. 

Thanks,

-Ted

 

[frame-it]

9 hours ago, tedwill said:

But it seems to me the multi shot photos would be better since I am working with for photos instead of enhancing one. 

you already have your answer

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hofo100]

LR/PS super resolution is a good fall-back in case you need highest possible resolution for large prints and when, at the time of shooting, I could not anticipate that a large print would be an option, or in cases where multishoot is not even possible (eg on a windy day with a lot of leaves moving etc...). On the other hand - when I know that I am going for large prints or extreme crop (1:3 pano) I try to take the photo in multishot mode.

[Ba Erv]

I’ve tested the two options (Multishot/ Enhance-Super-resolution) extensively with the SL2-S and can’t find any real discernible difference.  Except, carrying a tripod and finding weird motion artifacts in the image afterwards isn’t worth the effort to utilize Multishot.

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, Ba Erv said:

finding weird motion artifacts

you mean because things were moving in the shots?

[BernardC]

Just curious, what happens if you enhance the multishot image?

Is your end goal to make large prints? In that case I would compare prints. I find that difference that are minor on a display can become obvious in a print, and vice versa: differences visible at 1:1 are insignificant once printed.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

FWIW (I’m not a Lloyd follower or fan), he writes about artifacts (see updates)…

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2021/20210910_1420-LeicaSL2-MultiShotHighResMode.html

I don’t print large enough to care either way, but it would be easy enough to try and compare if I did.

Jeff

 

[jrp]

Yes, as you’d expect, he says that they’re both bad. 

[SrMi]

I can see slight difference when pixel-peeping (multi-shot better). The difference may be not noticeable when printing.

In theory, multi-shot should have less false colors (aliasing) and less noise. I have not tested it.

[Ba Erv]

7 hours ago, frame-it said:

you mean because things were moving in the shots?

Yes, if there’s trees, grass, water, etc motion the multishot combines the separate images and can create odd fractal type artifacts.  
 

I suppose if you’re doing product shots in a studio it wouldn’t be an issue.  However, outdoors even a bird flying through the scene can turn out looking like a UFO towing a GEICO banner.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Ba Erv

[Ba Erv]

7 hours ago, BernardC said:

Just curious, what happens if you enhance the multishot image?

Is your end goal to make large prints? In that case I would compare prints. I find that difference that are minor on a display can become obvious in a print, and vice versa: differences visible at 1:1 are insignificant once printed.

I tried it but saw some artifacts is the Enhanced Super Resolution images there also.  I think LR has a limit on image size where the algorithm begins to fall apart during the processing.  

[SrMi]

5 hours ago, Ba Erv said:

Yes, if there’s trees, grass, water, etc motion the multishot combines the separate images and can create odd fractal type artifacts.  
 

I suppose if you’re doing product shots in a studio it wouldn’t be an issue.  However, outdoors even a bird flying through the scene can turn out looking like a UFO towing a GEICO banner.

I have found Motion Artefacts Correction deals nicely with slight tree or grass movements.

[robb]

I have found multi-shot on the SL2 a noticeable benefit.  I haven’t noticed any problems with the images even with moving items (like people or cars) in the images.  I’m not that worried about slight movement of grass, water, or leaves as most of my work is architecture, aviation, and infrastructure.  It’s a nice feature with more versatility to me than a phase one back - mainly for cost and ease of setup / versatility / lens choice, etc.

 

The details on fine text and edges is fantastic.  If I am shooting a project and end up with about 20-30 images to deliver to the client, I also shoot the 3 or 4 most impactful views with multi-shot so they (or I) can print very large for trade show banners, wall prints at office entries, etc.  

 

That way I have some large images in the can but can rely on the majority of images at 47mp.  
 

There is also a size limit on the photoshop enhance tool.  So it won’t be very usable with the multi-shot images in many cases.  I can’t recall the limits.

 

Robb

[robb]

Found this

 

PSD limits pixel dimensions to 30,000 x 30,000 and max size to 2GB.

 

PSD files are limited to 2 Gig because of the file format design and compatibility with other applications.

 

Robb

[frame-it]

OR

PSB, which the printing company can later open in photoshop

When a Photoshop user wants to save an image larger than 30,000 x 30,000 pixels and preserve the layer-based edits they've made to that image, they must save the image as a PSB file. The PSB file format is designed specifically to allow Photoshop users to save large Photoshop documents, whether the document is large in actual size or file size. Images larger than 2 GB in file size must also be saved as PSB files, regardless of how many pixels they contain.

PSB files contain the same types of image, text, edit, and effect layers as PSD files. In fact, the PSB file format is roughly identical to the PSD file format, except that it allows users to save larger images. However, the PSB format is not supported by as many programs as the PSD format, which means you may have trouble opening a PSB file outside of Photoshop and other Adobe programs.

PSB files can contain images that are up to 300,000 x 300,000 pixels in size. Photoshop does not allow users to create images larger than 300,000 x 300,000 pixels.

 

OR

save as TIFF