For maximum sharpness I found that using Max Quality mode and the Man Made setting in V5.0 gives the best results. When Max Q is off (in preferences) I don’t see any difference in the Natural and Man Made modes and they both look like the less sharp natural version. I also compared a portrait and a scenic picture that was saved, to the preview, and they were both close to identical. I used GPU - high memory for processing and my GPU is a Radeon RX580 4GB on Windows 10 PC.
One other experiment was to take a small jpeg and run the old Dejpeg program first to remove artifacts. After that I used GP but there was almost no sharpening done. Apparently the Dejpeg program removed edges that would be sharpened.
And you, too, show this bug, dear AiDon. The problem is that you do not understand that this is a bug, the correction of which must be requested from the developers.
I already wrote about this, but I will write again. Only developers know what resolution the incoming image must-have for the algorithm to recognize it as satisfactory and adequately increase it.
If you plunge into history, Bayer filters and the like, it turns out that the actual resolution of the incoming image is much less than you think. Therefore, the blurred image stretched by the camera, and the algorithm cannot swallow such a soapy picture.
If you can reduce the image to real resolution, where each pixel carries real information, then the algorithm will work much better.
I understand your pain AiDon. The developers did not know or did not want to know this, that now orders for designers are made by people who are far from graphics. They take pictures on an old iPhone 5 and then send a photo with compression through Viber, after which only 1280 pixels and the wildest noises of the mobile matrix are left from the picture. And they are sure that they sent a beautiful image because on their phone they can still see it, but it doesn’t matter how it looks in Viber after compression. And not a single AI algorithm is ready for this.
For what it’s worth, your NVIDIA driver needs updating. I just updated mine, and while it might just be coincidental, I tried your image again and Gigapixel worked as well as it does on any other image. I’ve removed my earlier comment accordingly.
I hope you did not consider my image special? My processor counts at almost the same speed as a graphics card. So now I only process with the help of the CPU, it creates fewer artifacts in the final image. So updating video card drivers does not play any role for me.
Maybe this has been discussed already but I just notice an annoying problem. I use Bridge to organize and find images and when I select an image and chose “Open in Gigapixel 5” it only works when GP is not running. And when it works, GP fails to save the image and hangs.
Has anybody else noticed this?
I can upload the log files if anybody is interested…
Maybe I don’t understand what you said. Could you show what exactly you have changed after installing the new drivers, and what exactly was changed and worked as well as it does on any other image.
I changed nothing after installing the new driver - I simply re-ran your image through Gigapixel and this time the output was much closer to the preview. Not perfect, but if I hadn’t closely compared the two I doubt I would have complained about the output. I’ve done dozens of these today and I am NOT seeing the poor quality output that you demonstrated.
In the example you showed, the output looked barely better than the original (and in some areas possibly just the same) but definitely worse than the preview. Here’s a comparison of your original and my output viewed at the same size:
You have an option to open in Gigapixel from Adobe Bridge? I didn’t know about that. I can’t seem to find the feature. Can you post a screenshot of how it looks, the menu. Please. Thanks.
Yeah. Based on how it was described by hummersallad I thought there is an option to choose to open an image in GP like you can with Photoshop. But as far as I’m aware GP does not work as plug in or anything like that.
