Now I made some prints. I may publish my findings on my website or may not, depending on different factors.
Here is what I did:
- Tried to optimally process an image i Process Version 2003. The image was shot under good conditions with a Sony Alpha 900 + 80-200/2.8 APO lens.
- Made a virtual copy
- Switched to Process Version 2010 on the virtual copy
- Cropped for esthetics
- Printed both on glossy A4 paper (uncropped size would be 44x66 cm or 17"x25")
- Printing was done from LR 3B2 on Epson 3800, using 2880 DPI. Output was interpolated to 480 PPI in LR3B2 with medium sharpen for glossy, and 16 bits.
- Clearly visible difference in print, with better sharpness in the 3B2 version.
- Some lateral CA is visible in the LR2 image (although CA was reduced), it's entirely gone in the LR3B2 print.
- You need to pixel peep to see the difference, but it can be perceived at arms lengths distance
Noise suppression is now top class. Seems that Sony Alpha images are usable at ISO 6400. I also looked at an old Sony Alpha 100 image that was essentially unusable because of underexposure. With LR3B2 I could make it into a decent image. I clearly feel that LR2B3 represents a significant improvement in high ISO shooting with the Sony Alphas I have.
- When in comparison mode and zooming to actual pixels it would not show actual pixels but a coarse preview.
- When I made a virtual copy and tried to open both original and virtual copy in Photoshop I only got one image. I rendered the images in LR as I only have PS CS3.
Here are some downloadable files:http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/P...pare/index.html
The files are cropped JPEGS and images scanned from A4-prints of the same crops. Uncropped print size would be about 44x66 cm
Thanks for the feedback. If you get a chance to make some prints, it'd be nice to hear what you find.