| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
What is the best way to sharpen images? OPINION PLEASE
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 7:09 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> I am sure there are threads for this on here, but I just seem to be inept at finding them. I am sure there are tons of opinions and I just feel as if I am missing something. Here are the sharpening programs I have used and methods I have tried:
Genuine Fractals
Nik Sharpener Pro
PS - Unsharp Mask
PS - High Pass Method
PS - Smart Sharpen
PS - Doing Unsharp in Lab
Aperture - In program sharpening
So, what is the best method? I don't want to oversharpen, I just want the cleanest way to make the images have the "pop" they should. I am old school and seem to land back at unsharp just to get by for editorial. I just want to make sure I am doing this the best way possible. If someone has an opinion, what settings do you use?
Thank you to everyone who is about to send me a link.... |
|
Darrell Miho, Photographer
|
Los Angeles : SFO : HNL | CA | usa | Posted: 7:45 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> in camera.
if you're having to sharpen photos in post production before you send the files to your clients, then you need to tweak your camera settings. for any client that is reproducing your photos, any sharpening should be left to them and is usually one of the last steps in their production process. |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 8:22 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> sharpening is output device and size dependent, so as darrell suggests, if you're not doing an at-size delivery where you know the output device, you shouldn't sharpen.
that said, if you're doing your own prints and stuff, i've had good luck with Nik. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 8:40 PM on 09.29.09 |
| ->> Maybe I should clarify. For the editorial stuff, minor, minor adjustments. I am talking about for my use or for promotional purposes. For images for the website, prints I might make or maybe output for promotional brochures. I definitely lay of the sharpening for anything going to an end user. |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 8:42 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> for web, it's WYSIWYG, so for me, unsharp mask works well.
but for printing, there's a lot more math involved, so i think something like Nik can really help you out b/c the sharpness you see on your screen has nothing to do with the sharpness on a printer. but you get what you pay for at $300 or whatever it costs.... |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 10:16 PM on 09.29.09 |
| ->> I wouldn't sharpening advice from someone who has a blurry Icon/Avatar. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 11:38 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> This comes up every few months. All sharpening techniques for printed output work by the way the pixels interact with the halftone dots. This means that it is IMPOSSIBLE to properly sharpen an image until it is at its final printed size.
For the most part, this means that photographers should never do any sharpening unless they are also processing the image to its final reproduction size. Sharpening is the final step in the printing process before color separation.
Images properly sharpened for a specific press operation do not always look "right" on a computer screen. This means that you can't "eyeball" it. Sharpening settings -- like CMYK conversion settings -- are specific to an individual press operation.
If you are sharpening your images, you're doing it only for your own immediate satisfaction. For the best quality, it needs to be done downstream in the reproduction process and that means that somebody other than the photographer will almost always be doing it.
--Mark |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
|
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 11:59 PM on 09.29.09 |
->> For my own printing I use the Nik plug in and have been very happy with it. I like the presets which always seem to be right on based on size, paper and printer.
For client delivery I do a general sharpening based on my final output in USM. If it is a regular client, I base my sharpening to them on what I see as the end result in their publication etc and then adjust what I deliver accordingly.
For online use I also use USM to what is my visual best result. |
|
Clay Begrin, Photographer
 |
Petaluma | Ca | USA | Posted: 11:59 PM on 09.29.09 |
| ->> Mark, I have always shot in RAW and then prior to my image going to print, either being Printroom or another printer, I apply the "unsharp mask" filter to the image. Is this the correct process or should I be leaving the sharpening alone and let the printing lab do the sharpening. I believe printers like Printroom, etc do nothing without you requesting it. You may be referring to publications etc that you license the image to that regulary deal with receving images for print from photographers. I'm like Scott and could use some education about this topic |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Maryville | MO | USA | Posted: 12:24 AM on 09.30.09 |
->> Scott,
Another thing to consider about sharpness is that highly detailed images require less sharpening than one that is simpler. It's very easy to oversharpen a photo that has a lot of detail in it. Something more graphical, without a lot of edges can take more sharpening.
Best thing you can do is run a test. I might suggest you use some of the house advertisements your newspaper runs to test varying levels of sharpness. Print your settings right in the advertisement so you have a printed record. In addition, blow up small portions of photos to test them as well in similar filler ads.
I use unsharp mask most of the time. In some instances where focus is suspect, I'll use high pass. These days with digital I find I use much less sharpness than I did in my film days. The reduction of graininess may have a lot to do with that. I've never really put my finger on the reason but I did notice that my old settings for sharpness weren't suitable for digital images.
I cut LAB sharpening out of my workflow years ago because the Quadra 800 I was using took minutes to convert from RGB-LAB-CMYK. I didn't have time to spare. Often I sharpen the black channel in CMYK nowadays. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 12:46 AM on 09.30.09 |
->> Clay,
It depends upon your final output. I was addressing conventional halftone printing, such as in a newspaper or magazine.
Sharpening is a pre-press task. The people who can give you detailed information are the ones in charge of the press operation.
Continuous tone output, such as inkjet or dye-sub prints are different. You'll have to do some testing with your actual output workflow to determine the best settings for you. But again, only with the final reproduction size file. If you sharpen a full-size image and then shrink it down to smaller final output, you're essentially throwing away much of the sharpening.
--Mark |
|
Thomas Boyd, Photographer
|
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 1:08 AM on 09.30.09 |
| ->> I like the way Noise Ninja sharpens. I use the NN plugin for Aperture and works great and is very adjustable. |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 3:13 AM on 09.30.09 |
->> ric,
you're a sharp one.
a3 |
|
Scott Evans, Photographer
|
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 12:31 PM on 09.30.09 |
| ->> For web, I usually do a fairly light opacity high pass early on (maybe 20%) then after editing, will do local adjustments with USM using a layer mask if necessary. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|