Super Resolution Raw

[Les Sullivan]

The normal "Super Resolution" image is a 8000 x 6000 .jpg file ("original" - below) but by choosing the option to simultaneously save the RAW .dng images you have more control.

Mavic 2 Zoom saves 10 RAW images in the "PANORAMA" sub folder. The first is a reference image of the chosen scene and the remaining 9 are the basis of the montage.
In my, case each RAW image was about 24MB (3992 x 2242) and after "tweaking" the RAW images I saved them in Photoshop as individual .TIF files, each now about 70MB.

Using Photoshop - File / Automate / Photomerge - I blended the images. The resulting file is huge (3.8GB) if you keep the layers but a more manageable 639MB if flattened, in my view more sensible as you still have the original images.

The blended panorama contains the full extents of all of the images ("Stitched" - below) and is 12173 x 8961 16bit .tif

Crop the centre part of the image and you now have an excellent 16bit 11177 x 6508 file ready for printing ("Final Cropped" - below).

The images shown are reduced in quality to 500px wide for speed of loading but they give some idea what to expect.

 

[brett8883]

The normal "Super Resolution" image is a 8000 x 6000 .jpg file ("original" - below) but by choosing the option to simultaneously save the RAW .dng images you have more control.

Mavic 2 Zoom saves 10 RAW images in the "PANORAMA" sub folder. The first is a reference image of the chosen scene and the remaining 9 are the basis of the montage.
In my, case each RAW image was about 24MB (3992 x 2242) and after "tweaking" the RAW images I saved them in Photoshop as individual .TIF files, each now about 70MB.

Using Photoshop - File / Automate / Photomerge - I blended the images. The resulting file is huge (3.8GB) if you keep the layers but a more manageable 639MB if flattened, in my view more sensible as you still have the original images.

The blended panorama contains the full extents of all of the images ("Stitched" - below) and is 12173 x 8961 16bit .tif

Crop the centre part of the image and you now have an excellent 16bit 11177 x 6508 file ready for printing ("Final Cropped" - below).

The images shown are reduced in quality to 500px wide for speed of loading but they give some idea what to expect.

Use camera raw in photoshop to make the panorama and it will save the composite image as a .dng so you keep all the information from the original DNGs and it will be a smaller file than doing it as tiff.

Using Lightroom classic or camera raw in bridge will have the same effect

 

[jwt873]

The blended panorama contains the full extents of all of the images ("Stitched" - below) and is 12173 x 8961 16bit .tif

Very interesting... I've noticed that when the camera zooms and goes through the 'super rez' sequence, it does take shots that are slightly outside of what was framed on the phone or tablet screen.

Of course, the idea is to get a high rez image of exactly what was on the screen when you squeezed the shutter release, so they have to crop the stitched image. I've never messed with stitching the RAW files and didn't realize that you can get even more for your money

 

[Les Sullivan]

Thank you brett8883 I had not considered that possibility. Traditionally I would treat each RAW image in its own right and did not realise that with appropriate software it should be possible to merge a number of images and effectively create a single file while maintaining the ability to post process the RAW image. Obviously the data save with each of the merged files would necessarily be the same as they were taken at the same time in the same conditions.
The video that you linked to was interesting as it suggests that the "centre" image effectively becomes the RAW data image and the final RAW file, to all intents and purposes is a part of that central image and carries forward the RAW data for later processing.
My version of Photoshop (12.1 CS5) seems to have a bit of a problem here and I need to do a bit more reading but you have steered me along a more appropriate track.
I do not know what version of software the lady in the video was using but towards the end she said:
"... the maximum image width is 6500 pixels or 512MB...."
If that is still the case it rather kills it stone dead as my image is more than 11000 pixels wide, I am guessing that things have moved on a bit and that is no longer a limitation.
The idea of stitching the "un-corrected" RAW images and then being able to manipulate and correct a final merged RAW image is very attractive, thank you.
Update.... Further searches suggest the "Lightroom" limit is 65000 not 6500 but still 512MB so maybe not such a problem.

 

[brett8883]

Thank you brett8883 I had not considered that possibility. Traditionally I would treat each RAW image in its own right and did not realise that with appropriate software it should be possible to merge a number of images and effectively create a single file while maintaining the ability to post process the RAW image. Obviously the data save with each of the merged files would necessarily be the same as they were taken at the same time in the same conditions.
The video that you linked to was interesting as it suggests that the "centre" image effectively becomes the RAW data image and the final RAW file, to all intents and purposes is a part of that central image and carries forward the RAW data for later processing.
My version of Photoshop (12.1 CS5) seems to have a bit of a problem here and I need to do a bit more reading but you have steered me along a more appropriate track.
I do not know what version of software the lady in the video was using but towards the end she said:
"... the maximum image width is 6500 pixels or 512MB...."
If that is still the case it rather kills it stone dead as my image is more than 11000 pixels wide, I am guessing that things have moved on a bit and that is no longer a limitation.
The idea of stitching the "un-corrected" RAW images and then being able to manipulate and correct a final merged RAW image is very attractive, thank you.

That’s an old video, the process is the same but there aren’t those hard limits anymore or I’ve never found the limit at least.

What she was referring to about the center images was just how they get stitched together. The center image is the first image that gets added to the composite and then the other images get placed in relation to that center image.


Spherical: Aligns and transforms the images as if they were mapped to the inside of a sphere. This projection mode is great for really wide or multirow panoramas / HDR panorama.

Perspective: Projects the panorama / HDR panorama as if it were mapped to a flat surface. Since this mode keeps straight lines straight, it is great for architectural photography. Really wide panoramas may not work well with this mode due to excessive distortion near the edges of the resulting panorama.

Cylindrical: Projects the panorama / HDR panorama as if it were mapped to the inside of a cylinder. This projection mode works really well for wide panoramas, but it also keeps vertical lines straight.

All of these projection modes work equally well for both horizontal and vertical panoramas / HDR panoramas.
( Create panoramas and HDR panoramas in Lightroom Classic )

So no data is lost. You get a RAW panorama.

Since you are into panos you should try an HDR pano which is the ultimate pano. I don’t have a Zoom but you might be able to change the camera settings to AEB and then of course RAW and see if Super resolution works and taking 3-5 bracketed exposures.

Camera Raw (in Photoshop, Bridge, or Lightroom) can then take all the photos and merge them into a super data dense monster which will also remain a dng and have the combined data from all those photos to give you the ultimate in editing flexibility.

Here's an example of an HDR Pano you can open in Camera Raw to see the editing flexibility. This isn't my best so I never used it but you can play around with it if you'd like. Obviously it can't be viewed in a normal image editor and certainly not in the forum.

09_30_19Panoraw.dng

drive.google.com

I do have an edited HDR Pano that I did and it's a good example of the range you can get in a single image.

You can see with a normal back lit photo like this you’d never be able to get the details from the city in there and the black in the clouds. You could punch it even more but my rule on HDR is it should never be obvious that it’s an HDR. Maybe if you look at it hard and really consider it but I hate HDRs where you look at it and immediately know it’s an HDR

 

[brett8883]

"... the maximum image width is 6500 pixels or 512MB...."
If that is still the case it rather kills it stone dead as my image is more than 11000 pixels wide, I am guessing that things have moved on a bit and that is no longer a limitation.

Remember too that a RAW file doesn’t have “pixels” in the way you mean. A 512MB Raw file would be a absolute monstrosity without a rhyme or reason ?.

I just checked and the maximum RAW file Camera Raw can handle is 537MP. The one I’m testing is 39478 by 13595 but is an HDR. At any rate you don’t need anything this big for any purpose.