Sharpening Preference

[preston_harper]

DO you prefer sharpening your photos using Lightroom or CS3, and what have been your experiences with

either/both? Any tips?

 

Cheers

[ronald_moravec1]

I prefer doing the initial sharpening using the detail/sharpen tab in CS3 raw (lightroom should be the same). View 100% and hold down option key and you can see what areas will be masked off that will not sharpen. Move the slider to change selection. Detail setting has similar option. I normally use a setting of 25 to 30 on sharpness. Others vary depending on subject matter.

 

Final sharpen is done at final size JPEG and is usually High Pass sharpening which just sharpens edges. I see little point in sharpening areas of continuous tone such as skin or skies.

[petemillis]

Neither.

 

I like to do initial sharpen in the RAW part of Canon DPP, then do the curves and all that stuff, then revisit sharpening in the RGB tab before converting and saving as whatever size TIFF or JPG. Have also used GIMP2 for the processing and sharpening work, but always after initial "pre post-processing" sharpen to correct for AA filter in Canon DPP.

[marshall]

For stuff that I print most carefully, I use Photokit Sharpener. When I don't use that, I still actually use Unsharp Mask in PS, often splitting the Lighten and Darken sides for finer control. When I'm just putting out images in mass quantities, Lightroom's output to jpeg is usually fine.

[patricklavoie]

i prefer to do it in CS3, with no sharpen apply at all in my raw developper.

 

I use a 3 step sharpening using the smart sharpen tool, a powerfull tool already included in CS3.

 

1_ Capture Sharpening is applied early in the image-editing process, and just aims to restore any sharpness that

was lost in the capture process.

 

2_ Creative Sharpening is usually applied locally to accentuate specific features in an image-for example, we

often give eyes a little extra sharpness in head shots.

 

3_ Output Sharpening is applied to files that have already had capture and creative sharpening applied, after

they've been sized to final output resolution, and is tailored to a specific type of output process.

 

A good book on the subject is Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop CS2 by Bruce Fraser

 

Its a matter of preference as im use to get what i want with this tool rather than using the newer one in Lr. I

didtn see any major difference as for the quality when done in Lr2 vs CS3. I in the other hand dont like at all

the output sharpening in Lr2 export dialogue as even the smallest amount yield to to strong result in CS3.

[ellis_vener_photography]

"DO you prefer sharpening your photos using Lightroom or CS3, and what have been your experiences with either/both? Any tips? "

 

I use the sharpening in Lightroom as a relatively mild capture sharpener. Then when it is time for a photo to be printed or electronically distributed I 'll use an output sharpener based on: type of output, size and resolution of output. In fact what I use is the Photokit Sharpener from Pixel Genius, but Smart Sharpener, built into Photoshop CS3, works well too.

[SteveH]

For selective sharpening you can sharpen a duplicate layer, and then use a layer mask to "unsharpen" areas of uninterest

such as areas of low contrast or dark areas.

[ldw]

I follow Patrick Lavoie's approach for the most part using Photokit sharpener in CS2. Though I will say with LR2 I am more comfortable allowing LR2 to sharpen based on output (screen, print).

[johncrosley]

I have had VERY BAD results with sharpening in Photoshop CS3 when I have made any attempt to do further, later sharpening of any sort, including selective sharpening, for JPEG or TIFF images. If I use the preset levels of sharpening for my Nikon raw (NEF) captures, which usually are preset in the camera at 'high' but should be disregarded by the raw editor, I find there is a substantial likelihood of strong digital 'noise', especially in low-light shots with a camera such as the D2, the D2X and the D200, though not as bad with the D300, which I adore. It is my belief and the theory that the ACR disregards in-camera sharpening, but someone with greater authority should tell me if I'm wrong.

 

Now some digital noise is not necessarily all bad, and it can be useful or aesthetically pleasing to have digital noise if it is controlled and does not appear displeasing, but the noise I have obtained from modest sharpening in processing 'raw captures' in ACR to JPEGS taken in low light, then further processed in Photoshop and having some image adjustments applied, such as shadow/highlight filter and/or the noise filter (which has a 'sharpen' feature) has given rise to some horrible pattern-like artifacts that could please no one.

 

And I am NOT heavy-handed with sharpening at all -- just the opposite.

 

As a consequence, even though it appears that I am turning off 'capture sharpening' (noted by a poster above, which Shutterbug magazine says is essential to ALL digital photographs), I TURN OFF the digital sharpening tab in Adobe Camera Raw, by moving the sharpening slider to '0' before making my conversion from from ACR to Photoshop.

 

Then I process my workflow as I normally would, and that includes normal selective sharpening such as around the eyes sometimes, as noted, and especially where eyes also need some brightening and contrast where they're taken after sundown, then some sharpening, often by using the 'shadow/highlight tool, though one could use 'curves' as well after making a selection, or one of a variety of other methods.

 

I may decide that if an image has a large amount of 'noise' in it because it was taken at high iso and is otherwise 'thin' that it may benefit from being 'sharpened' using the sharpening feature in the 'noise' (anti-noise' filter in Photoshop CS3, otherwise I might turn either to Smart Sharpen for general good results, or for special uses and/or greater control instead to Unsharp Mask (USM).

 

And of course, if lens blur or movement blur is an issue, Smart Sharpen must be considered, as it has special filters to try to handle those situations, though they are not wonderful, and then there may be another all-around further need for more sharpening.

 

Whether an image gets a total sharpening or not depends on the image.

 

Because print images vary from web images in the degree of sharpening that is pleasing, I am beginning to store all my RAW (NEF) conversions after I've worked on them as TIFFs without sharpening at all, and using them as a sort of 'digital negative', although I also keep the original 'raw' capture and the sidecar so I can either do an intial reprocess or begin where I left off and make changes in Photoshop and/or ACR in Photoshop.

 

This may sound like a lot of work, but it pays off when there are a lot of images to reprocess in a short time, and many of my best-known images will be processed again and again, I believe, as some are 'timeless' and I am aiming for gallery sales.

 

Hardly anything condemns a print image as much as even the slightest degree of oversharpening, especially when the stored image is in a condition where the sharpening can't be undone, or the work can't be replicated.

 

Additionally, I store my images in several ways (hard drives and optical disks) in several places in the world, so no one disaster will ever deprive me of my life's work.

 

I know that may sound slightly off topic, but it really is never off topic if one considers one may have to recreate image editing, say to re-do an image edit when the stored image has been slightly oversharpened because it was to be presented as web view without a eye toward being printed, and then one finds that the original image has 'disappeared' because of a disaster (house fire, movers lost the boxes, girlfriend/boyfriend got angry and threw them out on the lawn in the rain, hard drive crash (they always crash) storage locker foreclosed for nonpayment etc. etc. etc.

 

The rule is that whatever can go wrong will and always at the worst possible time.

 

I have but do not use Lightroom, as I individually process each and every one of my images, and probably always will; I don't do events, weddings,etc.; all my work is custom processed for each image.

 

John (Crosley)

[charles_watson]

I use Photoshop.

 

1) Flatten Image

 

2) Convert to LAB

 

3) Sharpen the Lightness channel

 

4) Smart Sharpen on "Basic"

 

5) If for web, view 100%. If for print, view 25% [because a screen is 72dpi, a print is 300dpi, zoom out 4x]

[patricklavoie]

@John;

 

Using CS3 for your sharpen need, wheen having the kwoledge to do it with yield to far better result then any raw converter (except the new acr and lr2 that are really good, but a bit difficult for a newcomer) Using a plugin like Photokit Sharpener (that i dont use but know its good) or the SmartSharpen is the most efficient tool you can have. Of course, using them with mask will bring it even further. For me, a many pro that knows it, the USM filter is probably the worst sharpening filter that still exist; the smart sharpen is kind of a USM on steroid, create to do what the USM couldt do well.

 

As for Lightroom, you dont have to shoot zillion of frame to use it or use it only to mass developed your image; Lr is a DAM software at first, that could handle all your library, + its probably the best raw developper out there (with knowledge and some reading) to get the best of your file. You can use it to process 1 file at a time, creating preset to ease the job, and refine it..i do this all day long, processing image 1 x 1 to get the most out of it, then select those 8 shot and export them to what i need to work and retouched later in CS3. Its not a tool you should dismis, but learn how to work with so it could help.

 

@Charles

 

You dont need to go to LAB to do your sharpening, in fact you dont need LAB for anything..ever : )

 

The same could be done using a (to sharpen) smart sharpen to the background directly (capture sharpening) then by going into EDIT / FADE...you simply select LUMINOSITY and adjust the opacity slider in need..same effect as doing it on the L channel, without the need of flattening the file and loosing information going from RGB / LAB / RGB (yes you loose information, maybe not visually but in your histogram).

 

Without going there, let say that LAB its a good color mode (dont really know anyone that really work in there for a good reason) but anything you can do there could be done in RGB with the rigth blending mode, tools and fade command.

 

As for the %, always apply your sharpen to 100%, then when applied drop to 50% for inkjet print, 25% for commercial press like magazine stuff to have a look at how the image will look once printed.

_____________

 

I have a small and simple tutorial about how to use the smart sharpen, if anyone is interested, i wrote it in french for a magazine and its been translate for the rest of the world in english : ) Its FREE (people like that) simple yet effective..its what i use everyday as a photo retoucher.

 

Just get my email and ask for it.