Full size images. One 20 mp and one 50 mp. Large files!

[AndyS]

Old Crank asked about dropping the background out vs showing texture. I think his comment deserves a better explanation than I gave so a picture being worth a thousand words . . .
20 mp, 1.9 mb


My OM cameras offer the option of expanding resolution with sensor shift, so I gave that a try.
50mp, 4.4 mb


Any preferences or comments?

[Walleye]

1. It seems like the second one holds the highlight detail better

[AndyS]

3. In theory a larger pixel collects more light energy and therefore

can contain more information. So, by shifting the sensor 8 times each of those smaller pixels collects more light which presents as more detail.

I suppose using focus stacking would result in the same result.

As for resolution it can't be judged on the monitor as the largest image presented is 1 mp for 1080p or 4 mp for 4k. Ya' havta' download it and look at it in PS or similar editing software. Or print it.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I'm not sure which one actually is the larger image, but I think the first one is. I prefer it.

Both are fascinating and beautiful.

[AndyS]

5. The first is 20 megapixel and the second is 50 megapixel.

Any differences seen on a website will be subtle in the extreme.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

7. Subtle is the word. No wonder I couldn't tell!

And you'd even had the sizes posted right there!

Oh well.

[MLAA]

4. I'm going with the first one. That is the one I immediately selected than I went back a forth

looking at them and they kind of merged in my mind. Like at the optometrist, which is clearer, this one or this one!

[AndyS]

6. 😁😁

[MichaelSoE]

8. I down loaded the original images and then opened in PS at full size. took some screen shots.

Definitely more information in the files but as you stated it is hard to distinguish on a monitor.

[AndyS]

9. Yes, there is definitely more detail in the 50mp image.

Still, even with your enlargement it doesn't come across all that well on a website. It's pretty obvious on a monitor in PS.

That said I took some measurements off my screen comparing the size of the enlargements vs original image. Extrapolating from that the enlargement would be about 50 inches on the long side. So unless the two images were printed to 50x40 the increase in definition wouldn't be visible unless we apply the 'sniff test' (when a photographer gets so close he smell the ink). Normal viewing distance for a picture that large is about 8-10 feet.

Because of the limitations of the human eye 10mp is ample unless severe cropping is necessary. Apple did a promotion for their camera phones by "printing" pictures on buildings. From a block away they looked great.