ACR super resolution: another test

This is a quick update on my previous post. As before I let Gigapixel decide the best settings , and did not adjust anything in camera raw.

First crop:

ACR on the left, Gigapixel on the right.
It's always the case whatever the photo: Gigapixel looks a little sharper. But this has a price: some weird noisy spots in this crop. Also, the hair on bottom right is supposed to be slightly out of the depth of field, but Gigapixel tries to invent details to make it sharp, and with hair, fur or feather, it's is really efficient an realistic looking.
There is room to improve the impression of sharpness with the image from camera raw, mainly by adjusting micro contrast. I did not do that here because i wanted to compare the results straight out of the two softwares.

Second crop:

ACR on the left, Gigapixel on the right.
Again more impression of sharpness with gigapixel, but the lines, curves, letters all look a lttle artificial to me. Like enlarged vector graphics. It also created a few small artefacts in the aspirin bottle cap on top left.
Nothing special about the ACR rendering.

Third crop:

ACR on the left, Gigapixel on the right.
Same as before, gigapixel is sharper but tends to also make the thing that are slightly out of the depth of field sharper than then should be.

Fourth crop:

ACR on the left, Gigapixel on the right.
Here it is quite obvious what gigapixel does: it tries desperatly to invent sharp details where there aren 't any because it's not in focus. The effect on fur looks nice, but when uou look at the whole photo, it makes teh depth of field really inconsistent and illogical.

Fifth crop:

ACR on the left, Gigapixel on the right.
In this crop, there are definitely lot of weird artefacts and coilor change in the letters, and some sharp spots where the image should be out of focus.

At least in these 5 crops, gigapixel disn't really create some veryu disturbing fake details.

Overall, it's hard to decide... ACR is defintiely more natural and much much much faster. It's automated, no setting to play with. The results are definitely not spectacular compared to some results with gigapixel, but it is defnitely better than the standard bicubic resizing.

I'm not sure I really want to waste anymore time with gigapixel: adjusting the two sliders takes ages, the preview is slow, and the rendering painfully slow. After that, I still have to create a mask to recover the natural parts of the photos that are out of focus because of the weird details it creates or to remove the artefacts.

Previous part here:
Next part here: