luxBorealis Blog

Why are many online photos ‘dull’ and lacking in sparkle?

Sunday 1 June 2025

tags: Affinity Photo, art, black canvas, CaptureOne, dark mode, dull photos, IPad, lightroom, photography, photos that lack sparkle, photoshop, post-processing, white canvas

A quick and easy change will allow your photos to sing!

Funny you should ask, as it’s something I’ve noticed as well. YES, many photos appear dark/dim/dull and NO, it is not ‘artistic’ as some imply. In many cases, it’s simply a mistake by the editor, made innocently and without them realizing it.

Some argue that this a ‘new trend’? Nope! It’s poor craft, born out of not knowing the right way to set things up when editing.

The worst thing is when comments like this are made: “it’s up to you, there are no rules, except those that are made to be broken” as one commenter said.

My response: Please, do not perpetuate this ‘attitude’. Far too many students of photography (and I’ve seen my share over the decades!) use the, ‘I’ll do it my way’ arguement, or ‘That’s the way it was’ as a defence, when really it is down to poor craft.

Yes, there are rules. And, yes, they are made to be broken. But there is also good craft.

And good craft with full tone photos (which are most of the photos we see) is to have at least a few pixels of pure white. These few pixels allow the eye to correctly calibrate the tones in the rest of the photo.

Unconsciously, the first thing our eyes seek out in a photograph tends to be the brightest spot. This allows our brains to calibrate the rest of the tones. If there isn’t at least some pure white—especially when viewed against a white background like online, in photo books, and in prints—then our brains dim the whole photo.

It’s all done subconsciously, but we all do it. So the editor/printer needs to be aware of this tohelp the viewer with that calibration by having at least a few pixels of pure white. But how? Read on . . .

Additionally, highlights and shadows can be much livelier than are often shown in photos online. They are ‘dull’ due to poor set-up of the editing suite. When displayed on a white background, photos should be edited against a white canvas.

My theory (which it has been proven correct in countless workshop and class situations), is that many photos posted, particularly black-and-whites, lack highlights and have blocked up shadows because photographers are editing using the default BLACK canvas/background. This makes photos appear brighter during editing, but end up being dull against a white background.

Unfortunately, most editing suites default to black. ‘Dark mode’ is a trend, but it’s not helping photographers. Change the canvas (the area surrounding the photo when viewed in the editing suite) to white and you will see greater success in calibrating your photos (colour and B&W) for viewing on a white background.

The problem is our eyes are easily fooled.

Photos—both B&W and colour—should be edited against a WHITE canvas when they are to be displayed on a white background, as they are in most viewing situations: here online, in photo books, and as prints. BUT, many editing suites—Lightroom, PS, CaptureOne, etc.—default to ‘dark mode’ which is not the ideal. With Lightroom (on laptop, though not on iPad), and Affinity Photo, CaptureOne and Photoshop, the canvas can be changed to white and I urge photographers to do so. Simply right-click on the canvas just outside the photo and select ‘White’. Done.

The difference is subtle at best and, therefore, difficult to ‘prove’ except by observation, trial and error. Having seen it countless times, you’ll just have to take my word for it. Or, better yet, try it out yourself.

I’m from the wet darkroom era. Back then, good printing practice encouraged us to routinely curl the back of a print (pure white) next to the brightest white in the photo, just to ensure that the tones were bright enough without losing too much to pure white. This is just as important today with digital as it was back then. And having a white canvas helps.

I have contacted Adobe a number of times encouraging them to allow iPad users to set the canvas to white—and I’m not the only one! It’s just a a simple line of code that has been included for the laptop/desktop version, but for some reason they don’t see the need for iPad users, possibly because they are targeting Lr for iPad to people who may not realize the difference. Hello! There are plenty of us out there who know what they’re doing and are using an iPad for digital editing!!

Whenever I finish editing on my iPad, I export the photo to check it against a white background. Sure enough, 9 times out of 10, I need to brighten the photo before posting it to Facebook or Instagram or here—and I’m one who is aware of the problem! So, for those who are unaware, they end up publishing photos that are a bit on the dim or dull side.

So, keep this in mind when you are editing full tone photos—both colour and black-and-white. Check the histogram; export and check your photo against a white background. Or change your editing canvas to white—and pay attention to those few pure white pixels. It’s a subtle, but instant improvement.

Travel Photography: Capturing ‘the Essence of Place’

Saturday 24 May 2025

tags: digital photography, LiveND, olympus, om system, OM-1, Paris, techniques, travel, Travel Photography

We’ve just arrived home from 10 days in Paris, so I thought it would be helpful to illustrate what I mean by ‘the essence of place’. To me, this is the epitome of Travel Photography, when a single photo or series of photos reveal the true character of a place. Back in the 70s, Joni Mitchell captured the essence of Paris with:

I was a free man in Paris,
I felt unfettered and alive.
Nobody was calling me up for favours,
No one’s future to decide.

Travel photography is exhilarating. You are discovering new places or re-discovering old favourites. Either way, the places are different from home, making them more exotic. While creating memories is one of the driving forces for Travel Photography, the novelty of different places has a way of stimulating the creative juices, compelling us to see things differently, then photograph them.

Making the most of limited time

Like London, Berlin, Prague, Rome and other great European cities, Paris is dynamic and diverse, touristy, but also a working city. Capturing the experience of being there is difficult at best. It’s taken me a few visits to really get to know the city, so what do you do when you’re only there once and for only a few days? I have a some suggestions that apply to really anywhere you travel:

Don’t book a tour—book a flat. Use Booking.com or AirBnB to find a place near one of the main Metro stations. This gets you away from the higher cost, touristy areas and into the real city. It also allows you the flexibility of making your own plans and meals. Getting out into grocery stores, bakeries and green grocers, connects you with the neighbourhood around your flat. You get to know the street, the shops, the cafés, the terraces—the places people live in.

If I had my way, I’d just walk through those doors
And wander down the Champs-Élysées
Going café to cabaret
Thinking how I’ll feel when I find
That very good friend of mine
—Joni Mitchell, ‘A Free Man in Paris’

If it’s your first time in a city, get a ticket to one of the Hop-On-Hop-Off tourist buses and spend a day getting to know the layout. This gets the touristy places checked off and helps you develop a feel for the city. Then, you can return to and spend more time in places you found most engaging. But beware, you still need to be in the streets around your flat to really get to know the city.

Save the museum visits for the 10am to 4pm time slots so you can get out onto the streets in the morning and evening. (Aside: Also, book your tickets ahead of time to save time in the queues.) For outdoor street photography and views of iconic places, you want to be there when the low-angle, warmer light is on your side. And, consider staying out after sunset to capture night scenes.

Spend time wandering the streets. Look for different views of the standard places and, more importantly, be open to seeing the unexpected. Getting out to buy groceries or patisseries or to enjoy a coffee or glass of wine at a terrace allows you to see the city and the changing light.

Whimsical Works. Keep an eye out for patterns, designs, shadows, street art, and street performers.

Try something different. Museums are museums, and can be inspiring. They display the masters of art and craft, grounding us in what the giants of before have done, and perhaps providing inspiration for the next generation. Taking a lesson from the Impressionists, I used a slow shutter speed to transform scenes, making them fluid, dynamic, even ethereal, as you saw in the Sacré Coeur and Carousel photos above.

The camera with you

You’ll notice that some of the shots in this article are made with an iPhone. Why? ‘Cause that’s what I had with me at the time. How many times has it been said, the best camera is the one that’s with you.

Am I distraught that these photos were ‘only’ made with an iPhone. Not really. The quality is good, plenty good enough for a small print, a calendar photo, even a page in a photo book. Could I make 16x20s from them? It would be a stretch and I would need to use an up-scaling app such as Topaz PhotoAI, but, yes, 16x20s are possible. What more do you need?

Could I win a photo competition with phone photos? Possibly. The images are unique, to a degree, but they are not earth-shattering. But what’s the goal with Travel Photography? Some of the photos you take will be competition-level shots, but not all of them, nor do they need to be. Now, if you’re a working pro, you will have a more-capable camera with you everywhere, all the time. But if you’re not, don’t sweat it, as you’ll always have your phone.

So what do you take with you? For city trips, my suggestion is yo go light and go versatile. I always have my trusted M.Zuiko 12-100mm ƒ4 Pro lens (24-200mm efov). It is sharp from end to end and, most importantly, wide open. With it on my OM-1, attached to an over the shoulder harness, I can walk around all day with it under my arm, but always at the ready. And, with the excellent weather sealing (IP-53), I’m never worried about rain damage.

When I’m out for a day touring around, I sometimes bring my M.Zuiko 8-25mm ƒ4 Pro (16-50mm efov), but I rarely use it. Yes, there’s some overlap and I could reduce the weight and bulk by choosing my Panasonic-Leica 10mm ƒ1.7, but I like the versatility of a zoom when I may not have the time to create tight compositions with a prime lens.

For details, such as gargoyles on cathedrals and when there might be birds or wildlife, I have my M.Zuiko 100-400 ƒ5-6.3 lens with me—but it’s not a lens I’ll lug around a city too often unless there is significant chance of a payoff.

One question I am often asked is, “Are ƒ4 lenses fast enough for dark interiors?” Ƒ4 has never slowed me down, probably because at ƒ4, the M.Zuiko lenses are still sharp. The two alternatives are (1) faster primes, which lack the versatility of zoom lenses; and (2) ƒ2.8 zooms. To me, the extra size and weight of them is not worth the gain of only 1 EV, which is the equivalent of choosing ISO 800 instead of ISO 1600. Any ISO now cleans up beautifully with the noise reduction modules in Lightroom, DxO or Topaz.

The Essence of Place

When travelling, crowds and queues are difficult to avoid. Too often, it’s a matter of ‘if you can’t beat ‘em, then join ‘em’. I know it’s trite to say, but what else can you do? Try making the most of the time you have. Get the ‘tourist’ shots, but also spend time walking the streets, looking for the different, the unique—a new way of looking at places millions have visited and made photos of, or a different view of a place people think they know. Try capturing the essence of place where ever you go, taking time to enjoy the flavours and experiences that come with travel.

Thanks for reading! Be sure to COMMENT — SHARE — SUBSCRIBE!

Terry McDonald is fine art landscape, nature and travel photographer based in southern Ontario. View his work at luxBorealis.com; select Workshops to enquire about Field & Screen learning and PhotoTalks for you and your camera club.

A Birding Day Out: Tom Stirr, ProCapture and the M.Zuiko 150-600mm lens

Thursday 8 May 2025

tags: Bird Photography, digital photography, Field Techniques

This week, I met up with Tom Stirr of SmallSensorPhotography.com to spend a few hours photographing in two locations around Burlington, Ontario. It gave Tom and I an opportunity to catch up, while we worked towards capturing some bird photos. Tom is the resident expert on ProCapture, so that was one of my goals. The other was to try out his M.Zuiko 150-600mm ƒ5-6.3 IS zoom lens.

The light was terrible—flat without direction and seemingly colourless with no hint of warmth or sparkle. Both of us remarked that we wouldn’t normally be going out in weather like this, but to be shooting together was worth it. The day was cool for May (10°C) with a cool breeze off Lake Ontario, complete with the threat of rain. About an hour in, there was a brief shower, but we kept shooting, remarking on the advantage of the excellent IP rating of our OM gear. Tom, who has been to this same location regularly, recounted watching the SoNiCan crowd disperse with the first bit of rain.

One thing that surprised me about the day was how approachable the birds were in both locations: Grindstone Marsh and the La Salle Trail along Burlington Bay. At Grindstone, the Tree Swallows and Red-winged Blackbirds were all around us and the Great Blue Heron did not fly off at our first movement, like they do around where I live. At La Salle, it wasn’t just that the chickadees and nuthatches, who are accustomed to being hand-fed, but also the cardinals, wrens, even a Red-tailed Hawk that seemed to lack the skittishness found almost anywhere else. The warblers were more evasive, but that’s to be expected as they are just passing through.

Grindstone Marsh is a fairly small area, but with pathways that allow photographers to move around the marsh to capture different angles. The diversity is good, with many of the common waterbirds moving in an outl: Common Terns, Canada Geese, Mute Swans, Cormorants, plus a number of tree birds and, on better days, Ospreys feeding. Tom told me how this is quite a draw for the long lens crowd, with up to four osprey feeding at once, particularly when teaching the youngsters how to feed. Even under the dreadful conditions we had, we were both surprised at how quickly two hours passed, especially as we patiently waited for tree swallows to do something more than just perch.

ProCapture is a fascinating, if not slightly frustrating computational mode. It is ingenious in taking and spooling images prior to releasing the shutter, then saving the last 25 or so (how ever many are programmed) plus the number programmed after release. Given our naturally slow reaction times, it allows users to capture the moment a bird takes flight. Mid-air shots are far more interesting than static perching. For me, however, it will take some getting used to.

The theory of ProCapture is brilliant; it’s my practice, or lack of it, that generates the frustration. I end up taking a gazillion frames which I must then wade through, checking the sharpness of each. I’m also very poor at throwing frames in the bin, which I’ve had to learn to do en masse. My biggest faux pas is forgetting ProCapture is set, then wondering why dozens of frames are being saved to my card. As I become more proficient with ProCapture, I’m sure these teething problems will diminish. ProCapture is a technique Tom has mastered, so if you want to see how it is really done or have any questions about it, I direct you to the various articles he’s written at SmallSensorPhotography.com.

As far as the 150-600mm lens goes . . . I’ve been following the various online discussions around it and can now confidently say, what you read about the 150-600 simply being a re-branded Sigma lens is mostly hogwash. Yes, it’s made by Sigma, but to OM System’s specs. I noticed the additional weight right away, and though it is at the upper end of what I’m willing to carry around, it truly is an M.Zuiko lens through and through, given its excellent sharpness, its IPX1 water resistance and 5-axis IS that works with the camera’s own IBIS system for unparalleled stability.

The Wren below was photographed at 1/100th at 600mm (1200mm efov), which is unheard of. Tom has shots as low at 1/13. And the higher quality glass throughout means not only sharper photos, but snappy contrast as well. It is definitely a step up from my M.Zuiko 100-400mm. Having the extra reach of 600mm (more than adding a 1.4x teleconverter) at the same ƒ5-6.3 aperture, makes it a compelling lens, and is plenty fast enough with the OM’s excellent high ISO performance.

Ergonomically, the lens feels good in hand. It is solid and well-balanced. One very helpful feature is the push-pull zoom. While it has a rotating zoom collar, a switch on the side converts the lens to push-pull zooming, ideal for following birds and acquiring focus at lower magnifications, then zooming in to full magnification. The magnification level is high enough that this becomes the preferred shooting method, at least until one becomes more precise at raising the lens to the exact position of the bird—something which definitely requires practice.

To assist with the extra weight of the lens, Tom uses a Cotton Carrier Hyker Slingbag which integrates the Cotton Carrier slide holster for hands-free carrying. It also keeps the camera and lens ready-to-go. Without the Cotton Carrier, the lens itself has a strap and attachments which makes for much easier carrying than using an on-camera strap. Having now been bitten by the bug, it becomes difficult to argue against purchasing this lens, though the CAD $3600 price tag is nothing to sneeze at (currently on sale from OM System for CAD $2900 until 1 June 2025). I switched away from my Nikkor 200-500mm zoom specifically because it was a heavy lens—do I really want to be using a lens nearly that heavy again? Hmmm. Food for thought.

What are your thoughts? Do you have experience using ProCapture and/or the M.Zuiko 150-600mm zoom? Engage in the conversation by adding a COMMENT or a question below.

Maximizing Image Quality: In-Camera Pixel Shift or Software Upscaling?

Sunday 4 May 2025

tags: digital photography, HHHR, landscape photography, Pixel-shift, post-capture, Slow photography, tripod, Tripod High Res, Up-scaling

This is the fourth in a series of articles exploring how to get the most from modern sensors by optimizing the raw files they produce. Previous articles included:

Raw File Optimization, where I examine the usefulness of Lightroom Enhanced Noise Reduction compared to DxO PureRAW, OM Workspace, ON1 No Noise, and Topaz PhotoAI;
How well can Topaz PhotoAI and ON1 No Noise ’rescue’ images with motion blur?; and
Up-scaling Raw Files 1: High quality cropped images with Lightroom, ON1 and Topaz.

Introduction

Pixel-shift technology is a very convenient and welcome off-shoot of recent sensor stabilization technology. During a series of exposures, the sensor is shifted ½ to 1 pixel (or photo site) at a time, with the resulting images combined into a final, much larger file. What a great way to achieve more with less! But how does pixel-shifting stack up to up-scaling technology like that offered by Topaz Photo AI and Lightroom? I’ve chosen not to include ON1 Resize in this comparison as it simply has not performed as well as Lightroom and Topaz in direct comparisons.

**Grass, Web and Rain, Ontario**.
Olympus OM-1 w/M.Zuiko 100-400mm ƒ5-6.3 at 300mm (600mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1000, ISO 3200; 20MP raw file processed in Lightroom.

The base ORF from OM System (Olympus) cameras is 20mp (5184×3888 pixels)—plenty large enough for fine prints up to 16×20”. As an aside, astute readers will recognize that 16×20” requires a file larger than 3888x5184px to print at 300 pixels per inch. The difference between the base 20MP file and the 4800×6000 needed is negligible given how well files up-scale using, for example, direct export from Lightroom, as shown in my previous article.

When you need a significantly larger file to work with, ’HighRes’ mode comes to the rescue. It is one of the half-dozen computational modes available on OM System cameras and a number of other brands as well. With OM cameras, there are two options: Hand-held HighRes (HHHR), which produces a 50MP file, and Tripod HighRes, producing a whopping 80MP (10,368x7776px), large enough for a 34×25” print. The user can determine if they prefer a raw file and/or a JPEG. JPEGs are great for an instant viewing, but having a raw ORF is one of the essentials of good editing practices.

With OM System cameras, there are two added advantages of using HighRes mode:

Greater dynamic range: With an additional +2 to +2.5 EV, the dynamic range, improvement is significant (see Photons to Photos).
Virtually no noise: OM System recommends setting the ISO to 800 to ensure faster shutter speeds with no loss of quality due to noise.

Thomas Eisl, a strong advocate of HighRes, goes as far as saying ”When shooting still subjects, you should use this [HighRes] mode whenever feasible in order to maximize image quality.” Though DR and noise are important considerations, we’re not here to test them directly. Let’s see how HighRes mode compares to up-scaling with Lightroom Enhanced Super Resolution and Topaz PhotoAI.

Downsides

A few words are necessary regarding the downsides of HighRes mode.

If anything moves during the series of exposures—grasses and tree branches swaying in the wind or waves washing up a beach, even you!—users must either build that movement into the aesthetic of the shot or have a photo ruined by unintentional movement. Depending on the shutter speed, moving water is usually okay, but you need to carefully check it in the field using the LCD to ensure the water is smooth.
Things become complicated if you want to use computational modes such as exposure blending/bracketing (HDR) to capture a contrasty scene or focus blending/stacking to maximize depth-of-field. Shooting three to five frames, each using HighRes mode is theoretically possible but, as you can’t set the camera to do it automatically, you will need to manually change the exposure compensation or focus. If you’re hand-holding, the difficulty will be keeping elements in the photo aligned closely enough to blend the images in post production, not to mention any movement during the duration of the exposures. Furthermore, Live ND mode and Live Graduated ND are simply not possible with HighRes.

So—what to do? For starters, a tripod would solve the second problem (see below) and give you access to 80MP Tripod-HighRes. Or, make a perfect, sharp, well-exposed frame at 20MP and see what Lightroom and Topaz can do for you! In other words, read on . . .

Method

As with previous articles, I think it’s important to outline my methods to allow users to replicate my actions and decide if it ’works’ for them. Or, they can use my methods as a starting point for their own investigations and testing.

I’ve used two photographs that were shot at 20MP and, using HHHR, 50MP. This seems to be the most commonly used HighRes technology with OM System users. A third photo was shot at 20MP, 50MP and 80MP using a tripod. More and more photographers are leaving tripods behind having become more trusting of the industry-standard internal stabilization technology in OM System cameras and lenses.

A Tripod?

**Waterfall, Triberg, Germany**.
Olympus OM-1 w/M.Zuiko 12-100mm ƒ4 PRO IS at 13mm (26mm efov); ƒ5.6 @ 1.3 sec., ISO 200; hand-held, 20MP raw file made using LiveND and processed in Lightroom

While not quite redundant, the usefulness of tripods has diminished. From personal observations and discussions with others, the amazing results from IBIS play a significant role, but it is also about aging photographers who want to carry less. After all, portability is often why they chose OM System in the first place! Furthermore, large prints are rarely the end use of photographs nowadays, so there is the perception that tripods are passé. Hold that thought and keep reading, as Tripod HR adds more than just pixels.

I must admit I’ve greatly reduced my use of a tripod compared to the early digital days and before that, the film days of ISO 50 Fujichrome Velvia! The +2EV improvement from ISO 50 to the OM-1’s base ISO of 200 factors into my decision. Additionally, with M43, ƒ8 has the depth of field of ƒ16, which is another 2EV of improvement.

However, when I do use a tripod, I am instantly transported back to my film days. It’s not nostalgia, but rather a reminder of the value of slower, more purposeful photography. With 35mm film, there were only 24 or 36 exposures, or 10 or 20 exposures per roll with medium format 120 and 220 film. With 4×5, I only ever owned a dozen film backs which is 24 frames. And with each and every one of those rolls and frames, there was also the ca-ching, ca-ching of processing costs that quickly added up. Photography had to be more purposeful!

But it’s more than that. With a tripod, one is now removed from the ’click-itis’ one feels with the rapid-firing burst ability of digital cameras. Needed or not, bursts have become the norm for shooting everything these days, at least with many amateurs.

Furthermore, as tripods are an impediment to movement, I am forced to spend more time consciously and critically examining the elements of the scene in front of me, pre-visualizing and processing the composition without the camera.

When teaching workshops, I always coach participants to work static landscape scenes without a camera stuck to their face, moving around and really examining the scene to make composition decisions. This frees photographers to see beyond the viewfinder, and prevents them from getting caught up with technical manipulations before they’ve adequately addressed the aesthetics of the scene. With a composition in mind, it becomes ’chin on tripod’ to check the view and re-position. The camera comes last. But I’ve digressed . . . Suffice it to say, I love working with a tripod when shooting landscapes and, going forward, I will do so more often. But, this isn’t a confessional!

Processing

Each image was processed in Lightroom, following my usual procedure of breathing life back into the raw file. It is important to remember that raw files are specifically NOT meant to be used directly without being processed. They are digital negatives containing all the amazing potential of the original scene. JPEGs are stripped of this potential as they are compressed and sharpened and reduced to 8-bit in preparation for immediate ’consumption’. Yes, they can be edited, but if you’re going to edit, then start with raw. Editing a JPEG is like trying to change the flavour of a cake when it’s already half baked.

Processing typically includes making adjustments to Exposure, Contrast, Highlights, and Shadows after nailing down Black and White points. Colour Temperature, Tint, Vibrance and Saturation are also adjusted. For base images, Detail Sharpening is applied, often in the range of 60 to 90, with sharpening masking set to between 20 and 40. These are the values I’ve found to be useful starting points for ORFs from my OM-1. Interestingly, I’ve found that HighRes files do not need as much Sharpening Masking as 20MP base images. Lastly, Adjustment masks are added where needed to help shape the light, particularly with the Kilimanjaro Blues photo to better balance the sky exposure with the foliage.

Photos Used

1. Rothenburg ob der Tauber Skyline, Germany. OM-1 w/M.Zuiko 12-100mm/4 PRO IS lens at 34mm (68mm efov); ƒ5.6 @ 1/160, ISO 200 for both 20MP and 50MP HHHR images. Although only base 20MP and HHHR 50MP files were made, I still feel this is a valuable comparison as a richly detailed photo one might make while travelling without a tripod.

2. Kilimanjaro Blues, Tanzania. Another landscape typical of what one might capture while travelling, and with only 20MP and 50MP HHHR files made. OM-1 w/12-100mm at 100mm (200mm efov); ƒ5.6 @ ⅓, ISO 800 (20MP file); for the 50MP HHHR file the exposure was ƒ5.6 @ ⅛, ISO 1600. Needless to say, the light was dwindling as these images were made during the ’Blue Hour’ after sunset. At the Equator, twilight quickly fades to dark. While, the shutter speeds are slow, both images are sharp thanks to OM-1’s industry-leading IBIS.

3. Winter Afternoon, Grand River, Ontario. A classic landscape, one with a strong foreground and lots of fine detail, that takes maximum advantage of the benefits of HighRes photography—and for this, I used a tripod. OM-1 w/8-25mm ƒ4 PRO lens at 10mm (20mm efov). All three files—20MP, 50MP HHHR, and 80MP Tripod-HR—were made at the same exposure: ƒ8 @ 1/500, ISO 200. There was no reason to increase the ISO to 800 as 1/500 is plenty fast enough.

Up-scaling using Lightroom

Built into Lightroom is Enhanced Super Resolution which doubles the size of an image. It’s perfect for creating an 80MP from a 20MP file, however, there are two problems

Lightroom’s ’Enhance’ can only be used once—either for Noise Reduction OR Super Resolution, not both; and
Super Res cannot be set to any other value other than to double the pixels, so, how does one create a 50MP image?

Solution 1: After running a file through Enhanced Noise Reduction, it was exported as a full-sized 16-bit TIF with no Output Sharpening and ProPhoto RGB colour space. To maintain quality, it is important that Output Sharpening in not applied, as that should be done only at the end of processing, not at an intermediary stage like this. ProPhoto RGB is used as it is the largest colour space available. After importing the TIFF back into Lightroom, it was run through Enhanced Super Resolution with excellent results. As well, additional Detail Sharpening was applied as needed. I would prefer to restrict the workflow to smaller ORFs and DNGs, however, exporting a DNG, renaming it, and re-importing it doesn’t work; Lightroom still recognizes the file as one that has already been Enhanced. So TIF it is.

Solution 2: So, how does one create a 50MP image when Super Res only allows a doubling of pixels? Easy—I learned the value of this method when I tested various apps for up-scaling. Simply choose ’Export > Custom Settings > JPG’ or ’Export > Custom Settings > TIF’ and set the Long Side to what ever pixels you want, in this case 8160px. You would be amazed at the quality of the output. Check out my article or try it yourself. The high quality of the output was certainly a pleasant surprise.

**Autumn Dawn, Rideau Lake, Ontario**.
OM-1 w/12-100mm at 15mm (30mm efov); ƒ5.6 @ 1/800, ISO 800; 50MP HHHR raw file processed in Lightroom

Up-scaling using Topaz

I always prefer working from raw files, as does Topaz, so from Lightroom I chose ’Export > Original’ and added the ORF to a folder created for it. When opening a raw file, Topaz automatically applies its excellent Raw Denoise algorithm. I add the Sharpening module, followed by Upscale.

Topaz allows users to create Presets which can speed up processes. However, I treat each file individually, adjusting sharpening as needed using the various algorithms on offer—Standard, Lens Blur, Motion Blur, etc., typically ending up with Standard, but then making fine adjustments to ’Strength’ and ’Minor denoise’ while viewing the image at 100% and 200% to carefully check different parts of it: smooth areas, edges and detailed areas.

The first time I used Topaz to up-scale a landscape photo, the results were terribly soft and not at all encouraging. Going back to Topaz, I realized the AI feature of the app had auto-selected ’Subject Sharpening’ and somehow found and masked a subject, even though the scene really had no specific subject. It’s something to be aware of in the future.

Upscaling also offers some options—Standard v2, High Fidelity v2, Low Resolution, amongst others. Typically, I find Standard v2 most helpful, though with Kili Blues, I used High Fidelity. Comparing and contrasting the various options for Sharpening and Up-scaling is a rabbit-hole in itself, so I’ll not go down there now.

Each ORF was up-scaled to 8160px on the long side (50MP file) and, where appropriate, 10,368px for the 80MP comparison. Topaz can be set to conveniently and automatically save the resulting files as DNGs and put them into the same folder as the original. From there, they were imported into Lightroom for comparison.

For comparison, a 2x DNG (10,368x7776px) is 292MB; the same TIFF is 484MB. Although these are large files, my M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB of ram had no trouble handling them.

**Winter Waterfall, Ontario**.
OM-1 w/12-100mm at 31mm (62mm efov); ƒ10 @ ⅛, ISO 200; Live ND mode; 20MP raw file made using LiveND, processed in Lightroom.

Results

The proof is in the results, so it’s time to put you to work. I’ve split the results into two sections: 50MP HHHR mode and following that, 80MP TripodHR mode. I think it’s safe to say that the majority of photographers interested in HighRes will use the 50MP mode far more often than 80MP mode simply because users don’t want to carry a tripod. I get that. But before jumping to conclusions, let’s look at the results.

Results 1: 50MP

Carefully examine the following comparisons. View them at full size by clicking or tapping to open each file in a new tab. This will allow you to check the smoothness of the sky plus fine details such as rock/brick, leaves, grasses, tree limbs, and roof tiles. The tile roofs are particularly telling as they have low contrast details. How well do the various methods of up-scaling preserve them compared to HHHR?

**Rothenburg**: This composite is a 6000x2000px file. Each 1500x2000px section is a crop at 100%. What do you think? Note: Only for this comparison did I include the ON1 Resize file, if no other reason than to illustrate its weaker results.

**Kili Blues**: This composite file is 9600x4200px. Each 3200x4200px section is a crop at 100%.
What do you think? The mountain has a number of low-contrast details, while the foliage provides high contrast details. Note: the 50MP HHHR image does not have the giraffe in the crop as it hadn’t yet moved to that position.

**Winter (50MP)**: A 9000x4000px composite file. Each 3000x4000px section is a crop at 100%.
Be sure to view it at full size! What do you think?

So, now that you’ve seen direct comparisons, what do you think?

Is HHHR necessary to maintain sharp detail?
Can up-scaling a 20MP file do the job as well?
Which up-scaling method is best—a direct Lightroom export or Topaz Photo AI?
How noticeable will the differences be in a 20×27” print?

Let’s have a look at some comparisons of HHHR and up-scaled files using screen shots as viewed in Lightroom at 100%. Again, be sure to click/tap on the files to view the images directly.

The differences become a little more apparent when enlarged further. Surprisingly, both the the subtle and sharp details in the mountain face and remaining glaciers are much clearer in the ‘up-scale-by-export’ version than either the HHHR or the Topaz version.

Here is the same comparison of the Rothenburg photo. Be sure to click/tap on the photo to view the actual 4218×1812 file.

Pay close attention to the roof tile details. The details are apparent in the 50MP HHHR and Lightroom up-scale versions, but less so in the Topaz version. It’s as if the AI algorithm didn’t recognize those subtle details. However, some of the details are sharper in the Topaz version. Look closely at the stone work of the central building and around the windows with the blue-green shutters.

Now for the Winter photo details. Remember to click/tap on the photo to open the actual file in a new tab. This will allow you to see it at full size.

In comparing the HHHR with the Lightroom up-scale, I see that sharpening halos are slightly more prevalent in the Lightroom version and the snow is slightly ’grittier’. Now that I see them closely like this, I’d be inclined to reduce the Texture in Lightroom by 10 or 20 to better blend the edges. With that done, my feeling is, to notice the difference, it would require a ’nose to the print’ viewing distance along with a direct comparison. In other words, I’m not convinced the HHHR version is any better than thte Lightroom up-scale.

In comparing the Lightroom and Topaz up-scaled images, the fine details of branches against the sky look crisper in the Topaz version. However, the tree and shrub details below the horizon become mushy, and look like a watercolour painting. The snow and the water take on a creamy, almost smeared look as well. Just as I found in the up-scaling test of the previous article, some details are better in Topaz and some are better in Lightroom. Combining the two might be the ideal!

Having now had this closer look, what do you think? Is the HHHR version better enough to commit to using it regularly or is up-scaling the way to go?

Conclusion 1: HHHR vs Up-scaling

My feeling is, if a sharp, well-exposed 20MP file is created, the advantages with HHHR of higher dynamic range and reduced noise are less of a factor. In situations where DR is a problem, it is better solved using exposure blending with 20MP files. And, with modern denoise algorithms, noise is a no longer an issue.

Making a straight 20MP file also means there won’t be issues with movement between the individual exposures needed for an HHHR composite. Case in point—the giraffe—it simply would not co-operate for a 50MP HHHR photograph. Lastly, by shooting a base file of 20MP, users still have all the computational modes available, such as exposure blending (HDR), focus stacking, and Live ND/GradND mode.

I’m not trying to talk anyone out of using HHHR mode, but its advantages may not outweigh the advantages of using computational modes when they are required. It’s a matter of having options. Knowing what’s possible with up-scaling now becomes part of the decision-making around the tools available. Of course, if you don’t have access to a sound method of up-scaling or you are intent on only shooting JPEGs, then HHHR is the way to go.

Results 2: 80MP TripodHR mode

While a strong case can be made for using up-scaling instead of shooting 50MP HHHR, is the same true with TripodHR mode? Let’s take a look at the 80MP comparisons. Be sure to click/tap on the file to open a full-sized version in another tab.

Below is the 100% view screen captured from within Lightroom, providing a closer view. Click or tap on the file to view it at full size (4218x1812px):

Now that we’re comparing a straight 80MP Tripod HighRes file to two that have been up-scaled from the original 20MP file, are the differences more apparent? Is there a ’need’ for Tripod HighRes?

Conclusions 2: 80MP

I find that casual viewing of these panels shows no significant difference—much like one would casually view a print on the wall without sneaking up to it. However, when viewed at actual size, the 80MP TripodHR has exceptional sharpness, especially in the bare branches against the sky. The up-scaled files from 20MP are slightly less sharp, but they are still surprisingly good. Would they stand up to scrutiny in a 25×34” print, without direct comparison? Likely, yes. Certainly the average viewer wouldn’t find any fault in the up-scaled versions. However, other photographers might notice.

Furthermore, I find the 80MP TripodHR version to be less edgy with smoother gradations from highlights to shadows. Look closely around the individual grasses, they seem more realistic, more rounded in the TripodHR version as opposed to cut-outs in the other two versions. The water also appears more realistic. It is this realism with smoother gradations that cause serious photographers to choose medium format sensors, and 80MP isn’t too far off.

It is important to consider that adding a tripod to the mix changes more than just capture mode. Not only will there be the additional size and weight of a tripod, you will likely find that your style of photography changes.

**Limestone, Snow, Ontario**.
OM-1 w/12-100mm at 100mm (200mm efov); ƒ5.6 @ 1/320, ISO 200; 20MP raw file processed in Lightroom.

Discussion

With smaller systems and modern zooms, many photographers have become ’opportunists’. They carry all their gear with them, or a single wide to tele ’walkabout’ zoom. When they see a landscape, they’ll pause and capture it. If on the same outing, they see a macro shot, then lenses are switched and it’s captured. Lenses are switched again if a perching bird or a bird-in-flight opportunity comes along. This is the freedom of having a lightweight system that is easily portable—everything is brought along, though with adding a tripod, one may re-consider some of the lenses.

One Lens (and a tripod)

One of the most basic learning and seeing strategies in photography is to go out with only one lens. Back in the day, it would have been a prime lens, but now it’s typically one zoom lens, or one focal length of a zoom. Some would find this incredibly limiting when there are so many photo ops ‘out there’, each demanding a different lens. The ’one-lens-at-a-time’ routine forces the photographer to focus their efforts on seeing photographs from a narrower perspective, which, in turn, spawns creativity. It’s a well-recognized phenomenon in art and science: creativity stems from limitations, a.k.a constraint-driven innovation. Going out with only one lens is not unlike writing a poem with built-in constraints such as a 14-line sonnet or haiku or painting with a limited colour palette.

This is what a tripod does; it adds a constraint. Consider it ’slow photography’, similar to the ’slow food’ and ’slow television’ movements. Think of the works Ansel Adams created in the mountains of California backpacking with a 4×5 or 8×10 camera, 1 or 2 lenses and a tripod.

**Winter Afternoon, Grand River, Ontario**.
OM-1 w/8-25mm at 12mm (24mm efov), ƒ5.6 @ 1/1600, ISO 200; raw files captured at 20MP, 50MP and 80MP, processed in Lightroom.

Using a tripod means making fewer exposures, but being more purposeful with each set-up. As you becme more attuned to working within the constraint, you will begin to see more deeply and your photographs will begin to take on greater visual depth, creativity, and meaning. They will be less about the obvious and more about interpreting different ways of seeing. Rather than snap-snap-snapping, your work becomes more intentional. But, there’s a learning curve to slow photography and a weaning process. FOMO kicks in—we’re afraid of missing a photo. In economic terms, it’s the opportunity cost of choosing one style of photography over another.

So . . . back to 80MP TripodHR. One could shoot 20MP files and up-scale them to 80MP when needed. We know now, it ’works’ and it works well. Or, use a tripod, reducing the number of photos you make but creating images of higher quality. That’s what TripodHR does with improved DR, noise, sharpness and the smoother, more realistic gradations that become apparent. Since the camera is on a tripod, shooting multiple TripodHR frames for HDR and focus stacking is also possible.

But, you might also ask, ‘Why bother shooting at 80MP if a 20MP file creates excellent 16x20s?’ Good question; it boils down to how much larger do you need? But it’s not just the larger size; 80MP TripodHR also provides +2EV of dynamic range and noiseless files. Together, this boost in quality may well be worth the extra effort.

How you and others choose to approach their photography is a very personal decision. There’s no right or wrong. But being aware of the options available is one of the reasons for this article.

One thing I’ve learned from all this testing and viewing and comparing is this: if I have captured a great photo at 20MP—sharp and well exposed—I can be confident in having an image of high enough quality to print large. I won’t sweat trying to capture the same photo at 50MP or 80MP. Look at the Kili Blues photo. The giraffe was in the perfect spot for the 20MP capture and it was motionless. The moment could not be replicated for the 50MP capture. It may be ’only’ 20MP, but I know I can create an excellent up-scale from it, even with direct export from Lightroom and without resorting to Topaz. Funny that.

At the same time, I’m thinking that I just might start using a tripod more often, if only to slow me down and help focus my thoughts and seeing. Instead of having numerous, similar copies of the same scene, each of higher quality.

—

Thanks for reading! In the COMMENTS below, add your questions, comments, or discussion about up-scaling and the apps and equipment used. Please SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club, and SUBSCRIBE to receive an email notice of new blogs.

Terry McDonald is fine art landscape, nature and travel photographer based in southern Ontario. View his work at luxBorealis.com; select Workshops to enquire about upcoming offerings.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Olympus/OM System Tribute

Thursday 1 May 2025

tags: digital photography, Field Techniques, Nature Photography, olympus, om system, ontario

My friend Tom Stirr has written an excellent perspective article—6 Years. No Regrets., on the value he places on having switched to Olympus/OM System 6 years ago. I encourage you to read it! Tom is the man behind the excellent SmallSensorPhotography blog and has written countless articles on how he pushes his equipment to the limit to capture in remarkable photographs.

Note: Click/tap on a photo to open full-size in another window.

OM-D E-M1X + M.Zuiko 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 IS @ 449 mm, efov 898 mm, f/6.3, 1/2500, ISO-1600, **Pro Capture H**, cropped to 2788 pixels on the width, subject distance 11.4 metres. **Photo © 2023 Thomas Stirr**. Tom’s work with ProCapture is legendary.

While Tom writes of the technical abilities of Olympus/OM System gear—the superb lenses, IBIS, and the various computational modes so unique to OM—he also describes how the equipment has freed him to confidently capture images that would previously have been ‘hit and miss’.

OM-D E-M1X + M.Zuiko 90 mm f/3.5 PRO IS macro **with M.Zuiko MC-20 teleconverter @ 180 mm, efov 360 mm, f/22**, 1/250, **ISO-6400**, cropped to 4222 pixels on the width, subject distance 315 mm. **Photo © 2024 Thomas Stirr**. Note the settings in bold. Tom is able to capture high quality images from the most difficult of situations.

His words speak eloquently of the same feelings many Olympus/OM System users have expressed to me over the short two years since ‘joining the club’. There is an emotional connection to his gear that transcends megapixels and sensor size and the ‘bigger is better’ paradigm that is so pervasive in photography.

OM-D E-M1X + M.Zuiko 100-400 mm f/5-6.3 IS @ 285 mm, efov 570 mm, f/6.3, 1/4000, **ISO-16000**, Pro Capture H, cropped to 3718 pixels on the width, subject distance 4.1 metres. **Photo © 2022 Thomas Stirr**. Note the ISO and the fact this was shot through Tom’s kitchen window!

I encourage you to visit Tom’s site and have a read through, enjoying the dynamic and intimate images he has captured of the natural world around him. Needless to say, Tom’s technical abilities show through.