I find Super Resolution useful because it does me to crop an image significantly and then up-res it back to something I can print. My favourite camera is my little RX100 so a heavy crop can significantly reduce the MPs down to something that's a little lacking even at 12x8.
The denoise tool is, as you say, much better than the traditional denoising tools in LR and for a small sensor camera the new denoise is, with no exaggeration, revolutionary. While I would previously have been reluctant to go above 800ISO on the RX100, I now let it float up to 3200 knowing I can still get a good printable image. That said, despite having this tool built into LR, which is very convenient, these days I use DXO's nose reduction software PureRAW. I think it does a slightly better job than the LR tool and also incorporates DXO's lens correction modules.
I hope in future updates Adobe will offer a greater level of control over how these tools are applied (something that DXO does), but, thinking back to earlier versions of LR (I started back with version 2) it's incredible how capable these programs have become.
Super resolution is indeed a winner. As I age, carrying a heavy camera bag for hours becomes less and less attractive. So I bought a Sony a7C when it first came out. It seems surprisingly more compact than my Canon 5DIV. The kit lens (@28-62) is surprisingly decent and very compact. I got a couple of short primes, also compact of course. Generally the 24 megapixels are adequate. But like a lot of guys, I suffer sometimes from megapixel envy, and occasionally I want to print big. So of course I was seriously tempted when the a7CR appeared (61 mexapixels). But after your post on Super Resolution appeared, I applied it to several a7C images. Honestly, I can't believe that a7CR images would be any sharper (of course I could enhance them also, but that would be overkill).
As another part of my go-small-and-light effort, I've been spending more time with my new iPhone 16 Pro. I like the (claimed) 48 megapixel cameras. But I'm not wild about Apple-processed ProRAW images. So I've tried Halide, which claims an (almost) unprocessed Zero RAW. But Apple, of course, allows Halide to create its almost-RAWs only at 12 mexapixels. That's enough for most purposes. But I find that Super Reolution works very well with Halide RAW images, making them, in effect, the equal of Apple's 48 mexapixels ProRAWs, or so I think. (I find that Super Resolution seems to work erratically with Apple ProRAWs, sometimes well and sometimes less so, as far as I can figure out with tests that have been casual because I don't really care.)
Thanks for letting us know your initial results. I am pretty confident super resolution can make more than enough resolution than I will need no matter if I bring my little cameras (20-24mpix) or my big cameras. In some circumstances my littlest 20 mpix camera may actually produce BETTER and bigger prints due to its performance in edge cases.
I think the really obvious, smack-you-in-the-face benefit is using de-noise on high ISO images (3200 and above on modern full frame). The rest (including super resolution) are too subtle for me to bother with since I almost never print larger than 13X19. It's now part of my workflow: ingest, cull, select all ISO>=3200 images, AI de-noise.
The image used for denoise looks to as if it destroyed the buildings windows and doors after it's application. I may be wrong but it's what I see. Thanks so much for your work Ed, it's much appreciated.
I should have been more clear, the RAW details option definitely is better at preserving details than the traditional noise and detail settings. It certainly is not perfect and the screen shot is showing 800% to demonstrate exactly what's going on. Personally I rarely need or use any noise reduction but... sometimes it suites the photograph and rendition intent.
Good information - thanks! I’m usually on Photoshop ACR, which has mostly the same tools, although sometimes with different names, but I will check these out. For me, for now, the demarcation line between content aware/sensei tools and ai, is at text-to-image, but really there is no line because even the first good old content aware tools were doing some basic machine learning. I don’t want updates in the middle of a project, so I have updates set to manual. They send me a notification, and I get to it when convenient.
Thanks for the guidance and doing the pioneering work.
I find Super Resolution useful because it does me to crop an image significantly and then up-res it back to something I can print. My favourite camera is my little RX100 so a heavy crop can significantly reduce the MPs down to something that's a little lacking even at 12x8.
The denoise tool is, as you say, much better than the traditional denoising tools in LR and for a small sensor camera the new denoise is, with no exaggeration, revolutionary. While I would previously have been reluctant to go above 800ISO on the RX100, I now let it float up to 3200 knowing I can still get a good printable image. That said, despite having this tool built into LR, which is very convenient, these days I use DXO's nose reduction software PureRAW. I think it does a slightly better job than the LR tool and also incorporates DXO's lens correction modules.
I hope in future updates Adobe will offer a greater level of control over how these tools are applied (something that DXO does), but, thinking back to earlier versions of LR (I started back with version 2) it's incredible how capable these programs have become.
Super resolution is indeed a winner. As I age, carrying a heavy camera bag for hours becomes less and less attractive. So I bought a Sony a7C when it first came out. It seems surprisingly more compact than my Canon 5DIV. The kit lens (@28-62) is surprisingly decent and very compact. I got a couple of short primes, also compact of course. Generally the 24 megapixels are adequate. But like a lot of guys, I suffer sometimes from megapixel envy, and occasionally I want to print big. So of course I was seriously tempted when the a7CR appeared (61 mexapixels). But after your post on Super Resolution appeared, I applied it to several a7C images. Honestly, I can't believe that a7CR images would be any sharper (of course I could enhance them also, but that would be overkill).
As another part of my go-small-and-light effort, I've been spending more time with my new iPhone 16 Pro. I like the (claimed) 48 megapixel cameras. But I'm not wild about Apple-processed ProRAW images. So I've tried Halide, which claims an (almost) unprocessed Zero RAW. But Apple, of course, allows Halide to create its almost-RAWs only at 12 mexapixels. That's enough for most purposes. But I find that Super Reolution works very well with Halide RAW images, making them, in effect, the equal of Apple's 48 mexapixels ProRAWs, or so I think. (I find that Super Resolution seems to work erratically with Apple ProRAWs, sometimes well and sometimes less so, as far as I can figure out with tests that have been casual because I don't really care.)
Thanks for letting us know your initial results. I am pretty confident super resolution can make more than enough resolution than I will need no matter if I bring my little cameras (20-24mpix) or my big cameras. In some circumstances my littlest 20 mpix camera may actually produce BETTER and bigger prints due to its performance in edge cases.
I think the really obvious, smack-you-in-the-face benefit is using de-noise on high ISO images (3200 and above on modern full frame). The rest (including super resolution) are too subtle for me to bother with since I almost never print larger than 13X19. It's now part of my workflow: ingest, cull, select all ISO>=3200 images, AI de-noise.
Sound's right. I rarely see a need to up-size and am fine with my 20-something-mpix cameras. How do you find the RAW details feature with Denoise?
The image used for denoise looks to as if it destroyed the buildings windows and doors after it's application. I may be wrong but it's what I see. Thanks so much for your work Ed, it's much appreciated.
I should have been more clear, the RAW details option definitely is better at preserving details than the traditional noise and detail settings. It certainly is not perfect and the screen shot is showing 800% to demonstrate exactly what's going on. Personally I rarely need or use any noise reduction but... sometimes it suites the photograph and rendition intent.
Good information - thanks! I’m usually on Photoshop ACR, which has mostly the same tools, although sometimes with different names, but I will check these out. For me, for now, the demarcation line between content aware/sensei tools and ai, is at text-to-image, but really there is no line because even the first good old content aware tools were doing some basic machine learning. I don’t want updates in the middle of a project, so I have updates set to manual. They send me a notification, and I get to it when convenient.
I should have mentioned that these new features are also in ACR via right click menu.