Can the X-Trans Sensor's Image Detail be Improved with Topaz Detail 3?

After last Friday's post on the the comparisons and differences between the detail shown in the images made with Fujifilm's X-T1 and Olympus' E-M1 (which you can find here), I started thinking about if and how I could extract more detail out of the X-T1's files.  I think I may have found a way to improve the detail in the image files without buying another raw converter.

I have been a user of many of Topaz Labs plug-ins for several years.  Like any plug-in, there are times when an auxiliary software program can do things in an automated manner, or even do things, that we can't easily do or do quickly on our own.  One plug-in that helps with the appearance of images without leaving artifacts, is Topaz Detail 3.  Over the weekend, I started playing with the X-T1 images in Detail 3 trying to pull out some of the detail that we all know is there.  How do we know the detail is in the image files?  By the comments of those who use Photo Ninja and a couple of other raw converters that pull the detail out of X-Trans files.  I found that by judiciously adjusting a slider or two, I can pull detail out of the X-T1 images without leaving halos or other artifacts.  This simple adjustment seems to work very well on most images, but not all.  Additionally, it doesn't seem to increase noise or the appearance of noise, again on most, but not all, images.

The first example is the image on the right.  This image is the full X-T1 raw file with default Lightroom input sharpening applied as well as "normal" output sharpening "for screen" view as is provided by Lightroom's export function, as I would apply to all images to be viewed on the web.  (All images in this post have gotten the exact same treatment) The comparison image, below, shows a detail from the original on the left and the same detail after the file was adjusted with Topaz Detail 3.  In this case I used the "Small Details" slider only.  I think it did a remarkable job bringing out detail for using just that one quick adjustment.

The left side is the original raw file and the right is the same detail after applying Topaz Detail 3. Click for a larger image.

Looking at the image adjusted with Detail 3, I think what is happening here is a sophisticated increase in the micro contrast–much more sophisticated than just adding clarity in ACR or the Lightroom 5 develop module.  Image detail is being "extracted" for lack of a better term.  I think what I am seeing is more contrast in the small details.  There is much more detail in the grassy area as well as in the detail of the cannon.  I don't see any apparent halos or sharpening artifacts when using Topaz Detail 3 with this image.  It does make the image look much better, in my opinion.

The second example is our old, abandoned house.  On the right is the full image from the raw X-T1 file.  Again, the only applied are the same as mentioned above.

The two side-by-side images below are, on the left, a detail of the image from the raw file and, on the right, the same detail after adjusting it in Topaz Detail 3.

The differences I immediately see are that detail from the old, weathered wood is much more visible as is detail on the rusted metal roof.  Other small detail is also more apparent.  I don't see any halos or sharpening artifacts in the image adjusted with Topaz Detail 3.  To my eyes, I think the image after adjustment with Topaz Detail 3 is much better.  Why?  to me, half of the reason this image is interesting is the character and detail in the old, weathered features of this abandoned farm house.  Those details are important to the character of the image.

The left side is the original raw file and the right is the same detail after applying Topaz Detail 3. Click for a larger image.

The third example of comparing X-T1 raw image files before and after adjustments in Topaz Detail is an image of the tops of some pine trees.

This is the toughest test–highly detailed green foliage–for which Adobe's raw converter has taken criticism from me and many others as being inadequate in extracting the detail from X-T1 image files.  The detail is in the file.  As I mentioned, we know that from others who have used alternate raw converters such as Iridient (MAC only), Photo Ninja and Capture One Pro.  Can Topaz Detail 3 bring out that detail?  Here is the original as made from the X-T1 raw file treated the same as as the others.

I found it more difficult to make a satisfactory image from this image than the other two.  With the other two example images, and remember I have just started to work with Topaz Detail 3 and have not yet really gotten into the nuances and possibilities of the software, I only had to adjust the "Small Details" slider to bring out the detail.  It was rather straightforward.  For this image, I not only used the "Small Details" slider, but also applied various changes  in several other sliders to make the best image I could with my fledgling experience.  I think, with time, and extensively playing with the plug-in, the full power of the program can be found and applied to images.  Here are the settings I used for the image comparisons below:

Small Details Boost +.38
Medium Details -.16
Large Details -.25
Large Details Boost -.24
Deblur +.11
Supress Artifacts +.50
Highlights -.40

I used all those sliders because only applying the Small Details slider on this image also produced some visible halos around the branches and a bit of noise or irregular looking blue sky. Application of the other sliders seemed to reduce the effects of bringing out the detail.  Here is the comparison.

The left side is the original raw file and the right is the same detail after applying Topaz Detail 3. Click for a larger image.

I'm not as satisfied with this image as I am with the other two.  The ends of many of the pine needles have gotten too bright and I was unable to reduce their luminance with either the Topaz sliders or the Lightroom sliders, while keeping fine detail in the rest of the image.  Also, I was unable to fully remove the noise in the blue sky without losing detail.  Finally, there are some very light halos around the branches themselves that I couldn't easily remove.

Now, just to be fair, I'm pixel peeping and I don't have much experience with Topaz Detail 3.  Strike one and strike two.  I think that with more experience with the program as well as viewing the images at a typical distance, none of these issues would be apparent.

Coincidentally, when reading some photography blogs over the weekend, I found that David Taylor Hughes, a long time, prolific UK photographer (his blog can be found here), also found Detail 3 to be helpful.  I think the interesting thing is that he also felt he needed to find a way to better extract details from the X-Trans image files.

There you have it.  My initial tests in bringing out detail on X-T1 raw image files using a plug in in conjunction with Lightroom 5.4.  Is it the best?  Not quite in my opinion.  But it works pretty well.  The downside, however, is that the detail that should be apparent from the beginning in the initial raw conversion has to be drawn out through a convoluted process of using a plug-in for each image you want to improve.  That takes time and patience.  If you are willing to spend time and have patience, I think this may be a satisfactory  solution for many to the ACR issues rather than buy and incorporate another raw converter.

Thanks for looking.

Dennis Mook

Many of my images can be found at www.dennismook.com.  Please pay it a visit.  I add new images regularly.  Thank you.


All content on this blog is © 2014 Dennis A. Mook.  All Rights Reserved.  Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution.  Permission may be granted for commercial use.  Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.