Can you tell a difference? DPP DLO

I am testing this technique: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1265354

In looking at this sample, can you tell the differences? One is pre-DLO, second is DLO and the third adds in lens aberration correction.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

As far as I can tell, they all look exactly the same. Any difference that exists must be subtle at best.

The one with DLO is slightly sharper if you look closely at the rope but it's hard to see it at the small size you posted.

The pictures are too small to be able to come to any usefull conclusions.

My apologies. Here are larger ones.

1.just Raw to jpg

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

I don't really see a difference. Is this a 100% crop ?
Can you post the raw file ?

yb98 wrote in post #15544391
I don't really see a difference. Is this a 100% crop ?
Can you post the raw file ?

Here is a zip of the raw file. It's in the pic file of my web-site because the orig was too big for picassa.
http://www.designdedic​ation.com/pics/IMG_145​7.zip

I haven't done a 100% crop so I am not sure how to do one. I straightened a bit and cropped to a 3:4 ratio (if I remember correctly) and converted to jpg.

Here are 100% crop of non DLO and DLO versions.
For the DLO version I have set the shooting distance information slider at the middle and the setting slider at 100.

I have noticed that there was some NR applied before.
Here are another version with NR disabled and sharpening set at 3.

well, now I can tell! Thanks! I actually thought about the lens info after the fact so that would explain any pre-lens info changes. I am mostly playing around and trying to learn as I go. This photo was mainly taken to learn lighting and now I have learned the lens/exif change work around.

I have been kinda luke-warm on my "nifty fifty" but this certainly helps matters.

Thanks again!

NewCreation wrote in post #15544320
My apologies. Here are larger ones.

1.just Raw to jpg

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

2.DLO applied

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

3.DLO applied + lens aberration corrections

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

I downloaded them and was clearly able to see difference at 200%, but then by downloading I was also able to see your file names which gave the game away anyway. The DLO improvement on these examples was noticeable but not nearly as significant as I've seen in other examples, including some of my own. The one with the lens correction is easier to find since only one picture, the last one, show a slight shift in the image location.

It seems that the profile you used doesn't fit the nifty very well. Also, your subject isn't the most suitable for evaluation.

Here is what I'm getting from applyng the EF 85/1.2I DLO profile to an EF 85/1.8 shot (100% crop, close to FF corner):

Since the last release of the DPP Manual (mid-2012), the number of supported lenses has grown from 29 to 63, now including lens+TC combos as well.

If some of your lenses aren't supported yet, it makes sense to check the list often, as it seems that new profiles are being added at a fast pace, even between DPP versions.

agedbriar wrote in post #15547417
It seems that the profile you used doesn't fit the nifty very well. Also, your subject isn't the most suitable for evaluation.

Here is what I'm getting from applyng the EF 85/1.2I DLO profile to an EF 85/1.8 shot (100% crop, close to FF corner):

I believe you are correct on both accounts.

agedbriar wrote in post #15547478
Since the last release of the DPP Manual (mid-2012), the number of supported lenses has grown from 29 to 63, now including lens+TC combos as well.

If some of your lenses aren't supported yet, it makes sense to check the list often, as it seems that new profiles are being added at a fast pace, even between DPP versions.

Good to know and I will keep checking. Thanks!

agedbriar wrote in post #15547417
It seems that the profile you used doesn't fit the nifty very well. Also, your subject isn't the most suitable for evaluation.

Here is what I'm getting from applyng the EF 85/1.2I DLO profile to an EF 85/1.8 shot (100% crop, close to FF corner):

I'm assuming the photo on the left is the one with DLO on, correct? Since we read from left to right, often original examples are shown to the left, and updated ones to the right. But this doesn't seem to be the case here.