Optimally shot and then Enhanced to give an approx 240mp file...

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Anyway....regardless of whatever we consider "printable" for a big print, the M11 will kick it up a notch.

And regardless of theory, I do come out of newspapering. Where pictures have to hold their own, grab attention, and sell themselves even printed with 65-line halftone dots at 8"x10" on high-grade toilet paper.

[charlesphoto99]

It all depends on the intent of the image. I've blown up drum scanned TMAX 3200 shot at 6400, grain the size of rice, to 44X66 inch prints and it looks fantastic. All depends on the image and look one is after. This whole wanting to make every photo a perfectly clean, medium format looking, etc is the death knell of photography imo. 

[tashley]

58 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There

Well, it does seem quite obvious on my rather elderly monitor maze patterns and artifacts (purple bit here is obvious) But yes I'm pretty sure a 180DPI print would be fine. I'm also sceptical about the Erwin's Angels. I'm still with Michael about printing and I tend to think it works better if the printer does the upscaling (or perhaps it's confirmation of my laziness!).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

All the best

Ah.. that would explain it! there may be a cache weirdness going on but that file you show the crop of there is from the top of the thread. You need the one that has been down-resed to the same pixel dimensions as the IQ4 file, so the one ending in '24' in my post about half way down the page.... it wa actually re-shot at the same time as the IQ4 file and I had moved the bottles around and added some sage and rosemary for foliage. Delicious! The artefacting seems to have nearly all gone.

 

https://tashley1.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p834122565.jpg

https://tashley1.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p576049924.jpg

Edited January 25, 2022 by tashley

[jonoslack]

22 hours ago, tashley said:

Ah.. that would explain it! there may be a cache weirdness going on but that file you show the crop of there is from the top of the thread. You need the one that has been down-resed to the same pixel dimensions as the IQ4 file, so the one ending in '24' in my post about half way down the page.... it wa actually re-shot at the same time as the IQ4 file and I had moved the bottles around and added some sage and rosemary for foliage. Delicious! The artefacting seems to have nearly all gone.

 

https://tashley1.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p834122565.jpg

https://tashley1.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-10/p576049924.jpg

HI There - I was pretty sure that I'd chosen the right ones - anyway - here we go for another try

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Best

[tashley]

1 hour ago, jonoslack said:

HI There - I was pretty sure that I'd chosen the right ones - anyway - here we go for another try

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Best

Interestingly that is the on the original .DNG straight out of the M11 and it's also there on the IQ file but it is less evident. I just checked the cans though, and it's not on them! 🤣  The IQ file is on the left and the M11 on the right in your crops above.

 

Incidentally, my bad (sorry!) but you did have the right crops above, I lost sight of what ink bottles had been re-arranged and when. Those bottles have a very fine half-tone on them and that's what's causing the patterns - you can also see it just out of crop on the IQ file of the bottle numbered 318 though it isn't as noticeable as on the M11 file. It was also on the original DNG but it's move evident on the enhanced version, partly just because it's bigger but I think the algorithm has exacerbated it a little, too.

Edited January 26, 2022 by tashley

[jonoslack]

46 minutes ago, tashley said:

Interestingly that is the on the original .DNG straight out of the M11 and it's also there on the IQ file but it is less evident. I just checked the cans though, and it's not on them! 🤣  The IQ file is on the left and the M11 on the right in your crops above.

 

Incidentally, my bad (sorry!) but you did have the right crops above, I lost sight of what ink bottles had been re-arranged and when. Those bottles have a very fine half-tone on them and that's what's causing the patterns - you can also see it just out of crop on the IQ file of the bottle numbered 318 though it isn't as noticeable as on the M11 file. It was also on the original DNG but it's move evident on the enhanced version, partly just because it's bigger but I think the algorithm has exacerbated it a little, too.

I have to say, I really think that it's angels dancing on the head of pins . . . . . . but you started it!

 

[tashley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, jonoslack said:

I have to say, I really think that it's angels dancing on the head of pins . . . . . . but you started it!

 

I know, but watch them dance! They're so tiny and pretty.....

[jonoslack]

21 minutes ago, tashley said:

I know, but watch them dance! They're so tiny and pretty.....

I don't publish my comparisons (just a habit) but I could post hundreds of sets like this!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

All the best

 

[adan]

Again from the "old newspaper hand" - I think the textures you are seeing in the blue there (and various other parts of the product containers) is moiré between the half-tone screen (ink dots in a linear, but often tilted, pattern) on the can to get the blue gradient - and the M11 pixels.

Package printing like that is done with 3 colored inks half-toned into dots to get lighter or darker colors

Take a magnifying glass to those cans, and you'd see the blue is actually being printed something like this - magenta ink dots and cyan ink dots in rows and columns:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Put a Bayer pixel pattern on top of that, and then (and only then) a third, interference, pattern will be formed. "Ripples" and "bands" and so on. See the artificial "black tilted grid pattern" overlaid on the round dots?

Won't be visible to the eye (unless one's eyes have a checkerboard pattern of pixels ) but will be seen that way with a sensor.

Any Bayer-color camera would pick up such moiré from such a subject - if the pixel pitch is small enough and the lens sharp enough.

7 hours ago, jonoslack said:

HI There - I was pretty sure that I'd chosen the right ones - anyway - here we go for another try

Best

 

 

Edited January 27, 2022 by adan

[Jon Warwick]

Very interesting. If it is moire, then perhaps this underscores the occasional benefit of a camera that has pixel-shift "multi shot", especially for a static studio shot like this.  The pixel shift on say an SL2 or GFX or S1(R) would presumably eliminate the problem altogether.  Or if the image worked in B&W for this image, one could also opt to shoot with a Monochrom to avoid the problem.

EDIT: This is an old example of how the multi shot on my SL2 would clean things up a bit, and allow detail to come through (even though the underlying sensor was still obviously the same at 47mp, for both normal single-shot and multi-shot modes) .....note the difference in lettering and leaves between the 2 images ....

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/310699-leica-sl2-firmware-20-187-mp-multishot-mode/?do=findComment&comment=4081849

 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Jon Warwick

[tashley]

4 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

Very interesting. If it is moire, then perhaps this underscores the occasional benefit of a camera that has pixel-shift "multi shot", especially for a static studio shot like this.  The pixel shift on say an SL2 or GFX or S1(R) would presumably eliminate the problem altogether.  Or if the image worked in B&W for this image, one could also opt to shoot with a Monochrom to avoid the problem.

EDIT: This is an old example of how the multi shot on my SL2 would clean things up a bit, and allow detail to come through (even though the underlying sensor was still obviously the same at 47mp, for both normal single-shot and multi-shot modes) .....note the difference in lettering and leaves between the 2 images ....

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/310699-leica-sl2-firmware-20-187-mp-multishot-mode/?do=findComment&comment=4081849

 

Interesting. There's clearly just more data there, as you would expect. A clear improvement. Thanks for sharing.

BTW the pattern we have been referring to above is certainly mostly regular moire caused by the half tone I mentioned to Jono in #26 above. Always happens. But Jono quite rightly pointed out a little 'maze' type moire which is more unusual and which I've only been badly afflicted by once before on an M9 shot I took years ago in New Mexico and which I now can't find!

Edited January 27, 2022 by tashley

[Photoworks]

5 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

The pixel shift on say an SL2 or GFX or S1(R) would presumably eliminate the problem altogether.

 for pixel shift to work you need to daylight  or good video lighting.. Flash and most LED lights would not work