Wavelets to the rescue

[JohnRostron]

In June I was on Alderney (in the English Channel) where there are large numbers of Glanville Fritillary Butterflies. Because I have difficulty bending down, I was not able to get too close, and those images I shot were slightly out of focus. I thought I would give wavelets a go as a sharpening technique. From the original RAW, I cropped to the butterfly itself, without any resizing and with no other post-processing. This is image one:

#1 SOOC plus crop


I then used Astra Image 5 to apply wavelet processing, emphasizing the small and medium-scale detail. This comprises image two:

#2 with wavelet enhancements


There is a marked improvement in sharpness, most noticeable in the wing pattern. I was impressed.

What do you think?

John

[xpatUSA]

Good job!

I am fond of wavelet processing myself (RawTherapee).

http://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Wave...s_a_Wavelet.3F
.

[JohnRostron]

Good job!

I am fond of wavelet processing myself (RawTherapee).

http://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Wave...s_a_Wavelet.3F.

Thanks Ted,
I am still trying to find my way around Raw Therapee. I had read the wavelet documentation, but I could not work out how to actually apply it to an image. This is why I used Astra Image, which is very straightforward to use even though lacking in documentation. So, between the two...

John

[dje]

John that's quite an impressive rescue. The Astra Image software is not expensive but does it have a free trial?

Dave

[xpatUSA]

Thanks Ted,
I am still trying to find my way around Raw Therapee. I had read the wavelet documentation, but I could not work out how to actually apply it to an image.
John

John,

In the second tab where the sharpening/NR functions are, there is a function called Contrast By Detail Levels - this is simple wavelet processing for contrast only and has two handy buttons at the top to increase or decrease all the sliders - I find that one click on the Contrast+ button is sufficient - perhaps two for your butterfly. Then in the same tab I go to sharpening and select the deconvolution method - maybe just the defaults will do for your image.

I gave it try, needs a lot more than I said above to even come close to Astra Image!

Here's my result at right with Astra in the middle:



Here's the output PP3 so you can see what I did (a lot):

http://kronometric.org/phot/post/CiC/temp/GlanvilleFritillaryCropOrig-1.jpg.out.pp3

You'll see in the PP3 that I used some highlight compression and I might have cut back on Lab Lightness a bit. Had I not done that, RT might have about equaled the Astro Image.

I think you can use it in RT either by loading it or by changing it's name to your original crop.

That Astra Image is pretty good, IMHO.

[rpcrowe]

This is an off-subject post but, I think may be pertinent. Due to a pair of knee replacements and back surgery, I also have a hard time bending down for lower angle shots. This cane seat (eBay purchase) really helps me.

The handle helps me sit down and get up while, the seat (when folded) helps me navigate across uneven ground...

It's hell growing old but, it sure beats the alternative

[JohnRostron]

John that's quite an impressive rescue. The Astra Image software is not expensive but does it have a free trial?

Dave

Dave,

As far as I can see there is not a free trial, but it offers a full refund after 30 days if you are not satisfied.

I am using version 5. There is a new version 6 available, but I cannot install it as there is a conflict with my Kaspersky anti-virus. Astra Image is aware of this and aim to fix it if possible. Meanwhile version 5 seems to work well enough.

John

[JohnRostron]

John,

In the second tab where the sharpening/NR functions are, there is a function called Contrast By Detail Levels - this is simple wavelet processing for contrast only and has two handy buttons at the top to increase or decrease all the sliders - I find that one click on the Contrast+ button is sufficient - perhaps two for your butterfly. Then in the same tab I go to sharpening and select the deconvolution method - maybe just the defaults will do for your image.

You'll see in the PP3 that I used some highlight compression and I might have cut back on Lab Lightness a bit. Had I not done that, RT might have about equaled the Astro Image.

I gave it try, needs a lot more than I said above to even come close to Astra Image!

Here's my result at right with Astra in the middle:



Here's the output PP3 so you see what I did (a lot):

http://kronometric.org/phot/post/CiC...-1.jpg.out.pp3

I think you can use it in RT either by loading it or by changing it's name to your original crop.

That Astra Image is pretty good, IMHO.

Thanks Ted. I will explore Raw Therapee further.

John

[JohnRostron]

This is an off-subject post but, I think may be pertinent. Due to a pair of knee replacements and back surgery, I also have a hard time bending down for lower angle shots. This cane seat (eBay purchase) really helps me.

The handle helps me sit down and get up while, the seat (when folded) helps me navigate across uneven ground...

It's hell growing old but, it sure beats the alternative

Richard,

This looks useful but my wife always looks at anything that increases the baggage weight with skepticism. However, airlines will let you on with walking sticks or crutches, so why not this?

John

[JohnRostron]

Still on Alderney, I took photos of flowers. These have the advantage of staying still. This Scarlet Pimpernel was growing in short grassland, so I was able to lie down in front of it to photograph it. This did not cause any problems getting down to it, just getting up again. The original raw image was pretty sharp, but it still showed improvements when subject to wavelet processing, and to Lucy Richardson deconvolution in Astra Image. This was particularly noticeable in the hairs at the base of the stamens.

#1 Original image with minimal post-processing:


#2 With wavelet sharpening, a small amount at 'very small' a bit more at 'Small' and a bit more still at 'Medium':


#3 With de-blur deconvolution, using Gaussian and Lucy Richardson algorithm, 10 iterations:


Both methods show a noticeable increase in sharpness, but the wavelets are better. Note that the mottling on the petals is probably raised extrusions on the surface. These could possibly have been over-sharpened. Certainly they were if I gave it more 'Very Small' wavelet processing.

Another (expected) consequence is that the file size is increased, especially with wavelets, for a fixed jpeg compression.

John

[xpatUSA]

Still on Alderney, I took photos of flowers. These have the advantage of staying still. This Scarlet Pimpernel was growing in short grassland, so I was able to lie down in front of it to photograph it. This did not cause any problems getting down to it, just getting up again. The original raw image was pretty sharp, but it still showed improvements when subject to wavelet processing, and to Lucy Richardson deconvolution in Astra Image. This was particularly noticeable in the hairs at the base of the stamens.

#1 Original image with minimal post-processing:


#2 With wavelet sharpening, a small amount at 'very small' a bit more at 'Small' and a bit more still at 'Medium':


#3 With de-blur deconvolution, using Gaussian and Lucy Richardson algorithm, 10 iterations:


Both methods show a noticeable increase in sharpness, but the wavelets are better. Note that the mottling on the petals is probably raised extrusions on the surface. These could possibly have been over-sharpened. Certainly they were if I gave it more 'Very Small' wavelet processing.

Another (expected) consequence is that the file size is increased, especially with wavelets, for a fixed jpeg compression.

John

Good illustrations and technical info re: method.

You might find my triptych image here of interest. It mentions 'Piccure' which claims to add contrast based on automatically accounting for object sizes in an image - in other words, it sets various "radii" without you having to estimate objects' pixel sizes.

In a broader context, I find that multiple steps give better acutance than one giant stride. So it is that, in my referenced moon image - while RT does very well - a light application of Piccure does add further improvement.

Just as in FastStone Viewer: although setting USM radius 3.3px, amount 9 does up the acutance noticeably, applying USM radius 0.5px, amount 23, on top of that ** makes a big improvement.

(** FSV is non-parametric: you can keep sharpening again and again until your image is a total mess).