Output Sharpening Question

[keith_plechaty]

<p>With LR4, is it no longer necessary to use PK Sharpener? I need to publish several photo books on an HP Indigo (through a company I use called SharedInk) and I'd like to know the best route to take. I can either output sharpen all the images in LR4 or use PKS. I've been told that LR3 is optimized for Inkjet ouput only and not halftone. I'm unsure about LR4.<br>

Thanks.</p>

[keith_plechaty]

<p>Just got an answer on another forum from the actual maker of the sharpener for LR4. He said to use PKS if possible when printing on Halftone.<br>

I also have another workflow question.<br>

I need to print some large photo books that I have designed in InDesign. The final pages all need to be sent as hi res JPGs. With that in mind, this is what I was thinking:<br>

1. Import images into LR4, color correct, capture sharpen, export without any sharpening at max size.<br>

2. Place images in InDesign, resize as necessary.<br>

3. Run a script that will resize all images placed in InDesign to 100%, run PKS, relink images to InDesign.<br>

4. Export InDesign pages to a PDF and then rasterize as JPGs. (There is an option to go directly to JPG in InDesign, but I prefer Photoshop doing the rasterizing and JPGs)<br>

Does that sound right to you?</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>im sure LR4 alone is more then capable of making your image sharp.. in the DETAIL tab and alos when you export you can add some sharpness there.. using the matte setting witch seem more *crude* it should be perfect for halftone.</p>

<p>But to answer your direct question if you feel you need to spend money on something...<br /> your workflow seem pretty long and unnecessary... </p>

<p>1_import in Lr and do all you want there.</p>

<p>2_export to Photoshop and apply filter, save as TIF</p>

<p>3_place those TIF in indesign, create your book, export page as JPEG directly.</p>

<p>(dont see why you think Ps is better at that stage?)</p>

<p> </p>

[mark_sirota1]

<p>Output sharpening in LR4 is the same as LR3.</p>

[geoffrey_swenson]

<p>I don’t want to sound ignorant, but could someone explain the need for sharpening before the final output (capture sharpening, etc).<br>

If I don’t change the pixels in PS only apply adjustment layers can I just leave the sharpening to the end and if I do, do I still have to do it in steps or all in one. Provided I don’t need localized/creative sharpening?<br>

I don’t dispute the need for pre-sharpen; just want to know the why.<br>

Thanks,<br>

G.S.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Actually Geoffrey, that's a good, interesting question (not meaning to sound patronising there!)</p>

<p>The line of thinking was/is that capture sharpening was/is "necessary" in order to address the slight blurring effect of the anti-aliasing filter on the file out of the camera.</p>

<p>Sounds reasonable on the face of it, but for the last year or more I haven't done any capture sharpening on my files, and - hand on heart - I haven't missed it <em>at all.</em><br /> <br /> Avoiding capture sharpening means that the converted file is "cleaner" when it goes to PS, and the end result (following my usual selective sharpening regime) is just as sharp as what I used to get when capture sharpening was part of my workflow.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p><em>Sounds reasonable on the face of it, but for the last year or more I haven't done any capture sharpening on my files, and - hand on heart - I haven't missed it at all.</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

wow. then you must need to change your glass or you shoot in jpeg and your camera add already sharpen (or you use a raw developer that add some sharpness automatically).. because if you cant see it on your raw... there's a problem.<em><br /></em></p>

<p>And no, the end result cant be as sharp vs if you add some capture sharpening in your raw developer or in Ps.. it just cant. Or maybe you add your creative sharpening all over the place, in that case you kind of making a capture sharpening in different *shade of* here and there.. but the fact is that ALL raw image need capture sharpening, it is done or by the manufacturer raw developer (kind of a auto ON thing) or need to be done in your raw developer like Lightroom or Aperture or lastly should be done when you open your image in PS.</p>

<p>Here's what the 3 step sharpening are for;</p>

<p>1_ <strong>Capture Sharpening</strong> is applied early in the image-editing process, and just aims to restore any sharpness that was lost in the capture process. In Lightroom for example, on a raw file from a 6megapix cam to a 60mega pix cam, i use mainly those number for portrait but also for pretty much all my images... 50-1-25-0<br /><br />2_ <strong>Creative Sharpening</strong> is usually applied locally to accentuate specific features in an image-for example, we often give eyes a little extra sharpness in head shots. never add it on hairs.. it make them look artificial a lot of time.<br /><br />3_ <strong>Output Sharpening</strong> 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.<br>

For example; you want to make a 4x6 300ppi to be print at a local lab, you make a copy of your original file, resize it to 4x6, then apply a little sharpen on it. Example 2; you want to upload a image to Photo Net at 700pix x 700xpix.. you then start again from your original, make another copy of it, resize and again add a bit of sharpness to it.<br /><br /></p>

 

[geoffrey_swenson]

<p>My thoughts exactly. In my experience both scanned and digital files need sharpening, but I never felt the need to sharpen them before the final output. Actually, I never sharpen the full size scan/digital originals and only save them as a Base File with any background fixes and work on a reduced size master file. <br>

No you weren't patronising at all. We often keep doing things, because it is "In the Book".</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>Patrick, I think I know exactly where Keith is "coming from", and it's an approach I've just started to play around with myself in certain situations. </p>

<p>Yes, there is absolutely no argument that almost all RAW images clearly need to be sharpened if they are ever to be used at full resolution. </p>

<p>However, if the final product is a significantly down-rez'ed file, I see only very modest benefits to capture sharpening. In fact, if you over-do capture sharpening, it can introduce noise and restore unwanted high spatial frequencies that can show up as stairstepping, aliasing, halos and all the usual Nyquist artifacts.</p>

<p>So a workflow that I've just started playing around with is a modification / simplification of Bruce's 3 step procedure. In this workflow, there is no separate capture sharpening step, but at the output stage, if one of the products happens to be full rez, then you can apply the same (global) sharpening you would have used at the capture stage in the 3 step workflow. If, on the other hand, your output is going to be significantly downrez'ed, just apply your usual output sharpening for that size and output medium. </p>

<p>The benefit seems to be cleaner downrez'ed versions and the removal of an extra step. The disadvantage seems to be that because there is no input sharpening, it becomes very easy to over-sharpen at the creative sharpening step.</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>Errrmmm...</p>

<p>I'll let you know when I think you can teach me anything about converting and processing Raw images, Patrick.</p>

[EricM]

<p>I was taught that one does not manipulate a sharpened image so I don't do capture sharpening either. Any sort of intermediate "creative sharpen" (like the eyes or gloss lips) I do, is done on a separate mask layer. I think the same as Keith here and only output sharpen.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>Keith, when you ready, dont hesitate i love helping other with problem / difficulties or simple questions in there digital darkroom.. could be via private email if you want ; )</p>

<p>And Tom, i always do all my retouching, sharpen, darkroom etc... on my hirez file.. from there, i save as / export a copy to the desire size (keeping the original raw + hirez psd at full size).. i dont develop my file to anything less than the hirez. Sometime, with my personal file, i do everything in Lightroom alone as i dont need to remove / add stuff to it.. so the 3 sharpen can easily be done only in Lightroom.</p>

<p>If the 3 stage are done correctly, the result file at any size should look good. I do agree that *creative sharpening* can be left over as you do not always need to put some feature sharper than the rest pf the image. But capture is a must in many aspect, and correctly done (mean not over as many seem to do by mistake) it can just bring life to your file.</p>

 

[EricM]

<p>You know more than me, Patrick so I will give it another shot.</p>

[digitaldog]

<blockquote>

<p>With LR4, is it no longer necessary to use PK Sharpener?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The sharpening in LR is based on this product. There are some differences:<br>

1. Output sharpening is for screen or ink jet. So if you need to output to another type of device, PKS will do this. <br>

2. There is no creative sharpening in LR like there is in PKS. <br>

You do want to conduct capture sharpening (and more than just due to the filter, even scans may need it. Has more to due with converting a contone view into pixels. See http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/20357.html). Ideal to do so in LR due to parametric edits on raw data. </p>