Frontonia

Images made through a microscope. All subject types.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Wim van Egmond
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:28 am
Location: Berkel en Rodenrijs, the Netherlands
Contact:

Frontonia

Post by Wim van Egmond »

A series of Frontonia.

The last 2 were made with a 63X plan apo and a 100X planachromat. The 100X gives better contrast but the 63X gives has as least as much detail as the 100X. The first was done in photoshop the others in lightroom. There are details lost because of the jpeg compression. I am nto sure if there are ways to improve this.

Wim



Image

Image

Image

Image

Cactusdave
Posts: 1631
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:40 pm
Location: Bromley, Kent, UK

Post by Cactusdave »

It is possible to restore a good degree of lost detail by sharpening again after reducing to web size, either with Photoshop sharpening tools or with a smart sharpening plugin like Topaz Detail. This may introduce additional unwanted noise which can be easily removed with your usual noise reduction method, usually without sacrificing the regained detail. I tried this with three of your images and a good degree of detail was regained to my eye at least.
Leitz Ortholux 1, Zeiss standard, Nikon Diaphot inverted, Canon photographic gear

Jacek
Posts: 5357
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 7:00 am
Location: Poland

Post by Jacek »

Beautiful and detailed images


canonian
Posts: 890
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:00 am
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Post by canonian »

Wim van Egmond wrote: There are details lost because of the jpeg compression. I am not sure if there are ways to improve this.
Most cameras will give you a quality option to set varying levels of compression. Check your camera manual for this option.

If the above are single shots, just shoot in RAW format (.NEF) next time and edit afterwards.
You have more control over compression and will result in better detail.

With stacking, all frames have to be shot in RAW format and converted into 16-bit TIF files.
You can even think of pre-sharpen these TIF files before rendering in Zerene.
Zerene accepts TIF format files.

Hope this all make sense but to clarify:
http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/do ... _raw_files
Last edited by canonian on Sun May 26, 2013 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23223
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Re: Frontonia

Post by rjlittlefield »

Wim van Egmond wrote:There are details lost because of the jpeg compression. I am not sure if there are ways to improve this.
First, check to be sure that the loss is actually due to JPEG compression and not due to resizing. In Photoshop there is a Preview checkbox that can be toggled on and off while you are adjusting the compression quality. If this preview shows details getting lost, then your problem is definitely in JPEG compression. Otherwise, detail may be getting lost at an earlier stage, perhaps in the resizing.

Within Adobe tools, the only techniques I know to reduce or avoid lost detail are to 1) sharpen before saving, and 2) use "Save for Web" as opposed to "Save As". The first approach may avoid low contrast detail being discarded. The second removes some overhead in the files, which frees more space for image content. There may also be some difference in the compression algorithm; I don't know for sure about that.

I ran a test just now where I started with your third image (size 298,086 bytes), then resaved it to be Save As quality 4 at 106,607 bytes, Save For Web quality 46 at 105,248 bytes, and Save For Web quality 41 at 104,705 bytes after USM 50% at 0.7 pixels. The last one lost some of the fine striations in the wide area of the gullet (?), but other than that I can't see any detail loss despite file size being over 2.5 times smaller. The Save As quality 4 lost a significant number of the fine striations.

--Rik

Wim van Egmond
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:28 am
Location: Berkel en Rodenrijs, the Netherlands
Contact:

Post by Wim van Egmond »

Thanks friends,

Rik, I never thought of the save for web dialog. I must have tunnel vision. :) I have tried it and it is much better at saving in a low file size and retaining enough detail.

Fred, I do shoot in raw for single shots but for insect stacks I never do because I get so many files. For stacks I shoot jpegs with the least compression. But I could try it with raw and see if there is much difference.

Wim

Bruce Taylor
Posts: 827
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:49 pm
Location: Wakefield, Quebec / Ottawa, Ontario
Contact:

Post by Bruce Taylor »

All gorgeous!

RogelioMoreno
Posts: 2975
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:24 am
Location: Panama

Post by RogelioMoreno »

Wim, very nice!

Rogelio

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic