Is there a comparison of Super Zoom, Super Resolution and Preserve Details?

[acttranslations]

Hello,

We would like to find out the best upscaling method with PhotoShop. Is there a comparison of upscaling quality between Super Zoom (Neural Filter), Super Resolution (LightRoom/PhotoShop/Camera Raw) and Preserve Details 2.0?

Regards,

Hueseyin

[Kevin Stohlmeyer]

Hi @acttranslations any reason why you wouldnt want to do this comparison on your own files to determine what is best for your workflow/situation?

[melissapiccone]

I agree with Kevin - DIY. I've done this comparison myself. Preserve Details is junk - my opinion. 

[Conrad_C]

One way to compare them is that Super Zoom and Super Resolution upscaling are both based on much more recent and advanced machine learning than Preserve Details 2.0, which has been out for a while and yet is still labeled a Technology Preview (i.e. for some reason, after all this time, Adobe never promoted it to a finalized feature).

Another difference is that Super Resolution is capable of upscaling camera raw files, for potentially better results. The other two work only on images already opened as Photoshop documents.

I don’t know the technical differences between how Super Zoom and Super Resolution work, but at this point you probably will learn more from testing and comparing them with the images you typically need to upscale.

[D Fosse]

FWIW, my own impression is that Super Resolution - run on raw files! - beats Super Zoom hands down.

In fact, Super Resolution is the only one you can actually get away with, and in an emergency pass off as an original file. The others never look as good as the original. You get more pixels - but it also disrupts the pixel structure.

In most cases upsampling is in fact not necessary.  It may make you feel better, but doesn't really do anything.

[acttranslations]

Of course, I have already made comparisons myself, but I also wanted to hear the opinions of experts.

I can confirm that Details Keep 2.0 does indeed give the worst results. Unfortunately, as it allows the fastest workflow without detours in PS.

I could not see (with my eyes) a difference between PhotoShop Super Zoom and LightRoom Super Resolution. Super Resolution doubles the number of pixels, changes the resolution to 300dpi and creates 48-bit DNG files. If you need higher pixel count, you probably have to "improve" the upscale result again and again. I can't imagine this working without compromising quality. Since I need PNG files as the final format, I still have to convert the DNG files, which also bothers me. I would only go this way if I could see clear quality advantages. I have not been able to find that in my experiments so far.

For me, the best way is with Super Zoom. It offers the fastest workflow with satisfactory quality. I increase the factor to 5x and get the desired number of pixels with 300dpi in 24-bit and can save it directly as PNG.

I would be happy to hear from others who have also done such a comparison.

[D Fosse]

I increase the factor to 5x and get the desired number of pixels

By @acttranslations

Is that 5x linear dimensions - like 1000 pixels wide to 5000 pixels wide? I must confess I have a hard time imagining how that can look good. I can go with 2x for emergencies, but 5 is...well, a lot more than I would even consider as realistic in any scenario.

What is this for? I hope you're not doing large scale prints and are under the mistaken impression that 300 ppi is required at all sizes? That's a very common misunderstanding of what ppi is and what it means.

If a file is good quality and "decent" resolution from a good modern camera, it can be used as-is for any reproduction size. The bigger it is, the farther you'll step away to see it properly, so ppi goes down.

Oh, and Super resolution does not change the resolution to 300 ppi. It quadruples the pixel count (2x linear), but the ppi is whatever you assign yourself at that pixel size.

[Zesty_wanderlust15A7]

I don't mind Preserve Details for a quickie and found it very comparable to Blow-Up that does still seem to get many accolades.

-

For quality, I otherwise see several experts that are very complimentary re. Super Resolution.

Andy Astbury ( http://youtu.be/OQ3BdIJwjaY ) : "Super impressed. No interpolation artefacts. Topaz is crap by comparison. However, the ACR upsample ratio is FIXED at 2x on all edges. I genuinely do see the very best 2x upscale I’ve ever experienced — and I’ve used EVERYTHING. Hell, it’s even better than 2x Lanczos in Raw Therapee."

-

Photoshop User mag 2023.06 claims...
"Overall, ON1 Resize AI 2023.5 is an excellent app for anyone looking to upscale images for any purpose, and it stands well above the competition." (but they may have ON1 ads to respect... 😉 )

[guitarman008]

I've tested Lightroom Super Resolution vs. Photoshop's Super Zoom (Neural Filter). Super Resolution is far better. The scaling seems to add detail and very natural sharpness, very much as if you had taken the shot at higher resolution. And for lenses that seem to lack that final degree of sharpness of a prime, the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 in my case, it can make up for that as well. BUT you can't do both AI denoise and Super Resolution sadly.

[asx35672424ctst]

Super Resolution also has the ability to upsample camera raw files, which could lead to superior outcomes. The other two are limited to using photos that have previously been opened in Photoshop documents.