Super Resolution builds on a technology Adobe launched two years ago called Enhance Details, which uses machine learning to interpolate RAW files with a high degree of fidelity, which resulted in images with crisp details and fewer artifacts. The term ‘Super Resolution’ refers to the process of improving the quality of a photo by boosting its apparent resolution,” Chan explains. “Enlarging a photo often produces blurry details, but Super Resolution has an ace up its sleeve: an advanced machine learning model trained on millions of photos. Backed by this vast training set, Super Resolution can intelligently enlarge photos while maintaining clean edges and preserving important details.
Tried it out today - and it does nothing. Nowhere near the results of the Adobe test images - no surprise really - all the images they use to showcase their new features tend to be exactly suited to the task.
I download 5 images randomly from the web - and the enhance feature did nothing major.
This basically seems like they’ve developed better AI-assisted algorithms for maintaining sharper edges when an image is enlarged. In theory, it sounds good, but I’d be willing to bet their examples are best-case instances. In real-life use, I suspect the results might not be as consistently good. Who knows, though. I hope I’m wrong.
It bugs me a bit that they’re adding this to Lightroom before Photoshop (if I read right). I’m tired of getting over-processed, unnatural and artistically misinterpreted photos from photographers, then having to go back to argue with them about getting the originals. This new sharpening feature in Lightroom seems like another tool for them to abuse.
It also seems like a tool the stock companies might use to upsample their lower-resolution photos in order to sell them for a higher price. I’ve already caught them doing exactly this more than once.
It’s my real soapbox belly-ache at the moment – well; one of them! It seems that photographers are becoming progressively worse at processing images. I seem to get more and more from photographers who think they are Caravaggio. Like you, the fight to get the raw files gets more difficult in equal measure. I think it’s because technology allows second rate photographers to produce acceptable results. They don’t want the raw files let out because it will just expose them.
Stock companies (or the photographers themselves) have been uprezzing images since forever. I’ve long since gotten over being shy about asking for my money back.
Looks the same as it has always worked. Not sure why the super duper artificial intelligence can’t sort out that nuclear area alongside obvious color demarcations.
The difference is slight - but it did increase the resolution to 300 - but decreased the width and height of the original (when that was at 300 it was larger in size)
So seems to do an increase to 300 ppi - then a reduction in overall size at 300 ppi.
Anyway - they will let me know on Monday if it was good. They are only printing off an office printer, so who knows.
