RTH and ouput sharpening

[Bobobird]

Normally my basic workflow ends with sharpening. If the image/images are going to be posted online they are run through the Image Processor script in PS and output to jpg, usually 10-12 for quality and resized between 800-1600 on the wide side. The pic is then posted.

In the "3 recents" thread Colin suggested that it was beneficial to sharpen (again) after down sampling.

I was going to redo those 3 images but was working on another image at the time, so used his suggestion on the new one instead.

Views please.

1. normal workflow - down sampled to 1200 wide, saved as jpg, no output sharpening.


2. Output sharpening applied - 0.3 / 200% / 0, saved as jpg.


3. As suggested by Andre - 0.3 / 150% / 0, opacity 70%.


4. 0.3 / 50%

[IzzieK]

I'll go for the first one Bobo, even though both looks good and sharp. My old eyes doesn't like too much sharpening I suppose because the first one has more character and more "natural" looking, with a little bit of softness on the overall shot.

[AB26]

Hi Bobo,

Very nice image.

In #1 you got lots of detail. In #2 even more so. Initially it looks a little too sharp but opening it in the Lytebox it is fine. Maybe 150% will be a tad better.

[Bobobird]

Thanks Isabel, Andre.

This is what I feared - Isabel says #1, Andre says #2.

In any given set of pics - I pick only the sharpest shot. After processing, NR and sharpening I get to what #1 looks like. So basically my eye is trained not to let excess creep in. But with output sharpening thrown into the mix, I find it really hard to determine what should be normal and what is too much. I did think #2 might be a tad too much. #3 appears fine but maybe still a bit off.

Perhaps better trained eyes can figure this out.

[deetheturk]

Hi Bobo,i would be happy with any of them,great image!

When first looking at them i thought the same as Andre,but when in Lytebox #2 is fine,then i look at #3,its great also, argh!!,lol,all in all bud not a bad complaint,well done!

[Colin Southern]

Hi Bobo,

I think you're mixing your sharpening up a bit.

CAPTURE SHARPENING is nearly always 300% @ 0.3px (threshold 0 at base ISO, but threshold increasing at higher ISOs) - but this is always applied to the full resolution image.

Content/creative sharpening varies, but for me, is often in the 40% @ 4px area, also on the full resolution image.

Output sharpening is typically 50 to 100% @ 0.3px (the 0.3px is kinda just a co-incidence that it's the same value as capture sharpening).

I can't think of an occasion where I'd use 200% @ 0.3px for output sharpening for a screen image; it'll frost high-frequency detail.

Flick me one of your RAW files if you like and I'll see what I can do with it.

[Bobobird]

Ahhhhhh, got it now (I think).

Thanks for the offer but.... no, no, no, no, no, can't send you a file because you will do things to it that I would never be able to do. But would constantly want to do exactly that, which will stress me out too much....

[Colin Southern]

Ahhhhhh, got it now (I think).

Thanks for the offer but.... no, no, no, no, no, can't send you a file because you will do things to it that I would never be able to do. But would constantly want to do exactly that, which will stress me out too much....

No worries -- I'll just have to do it to one of mine then

[Brownbear]

Hi Bobo,


Thank you for posting this. I need to learn to do this, too.

I like #3 the best. #1 looks fine to me, and #2 perhaps just a tad too sharp but only on the very top of it's head, which seems perfectly sharp and natural to me in the 3rd version.

All gorgeous!

[Kaye Leggett]

I'm interested in this thread - following on from comments you made before on some images I posted. I get the difference between the sharpening and at what stage they are performed but with capture sharpening, using camera raw 7.1 I get a default setting to capture sharpening of amount 25, radius 1.0 Details 25 and masking 0 - is there anyway to change these preset defaults ? My amoun option doesn't go up to 300 either - only 150 - so have a got the decimal place different in my software ?

[GeorgeM]

I have to vote for #1. The other two are nice, but for me, something is wrong with the bird's eye in those.
BTW, I would be immensely happy if I had taken such a photograph.

[Bobobird]

@ Colin - .
I will upload this somewhere and let you know.

Thanks Christina, George. Both of you again highlighted the same issue that Isabel and Andre mentioned. How to tell? Each person has different perceptions. What would be a good middle ground.

Thanks Kaye - in Camera Raw, I have changed my default capture sharpening to 25/.8/25/70. The first 3 values are seldom if ever changed, but for Masking hold down the Alt key and pull the slider either way for a look at what level of detail you want. That little square box in the corner drops down and you can save it as new defaults and also save that setting for future use.

[Bobobird]

v4 posted.

Used 0.3 / 50%. Marginally "oomphier" compared to #1. This is it?

[dje]

Hi Bobo

Great image. For what it's worth, I think the output sharpening settings you've used are too high. I rarely use anything higher than 50% at 0.3. Another thing to consider is that if you are downsizing for viewing on the web, the output sharpening is mainly compensating for a loss of sharpness in the downsizing process and the different downsizing methods have different amounts of sharpening compensation built in. eg there are a few bicubic methods with different degrees of sharpening built in.

I'm interested in this thread - following on from comments you made before on some images I posted. I get the difference between the sharpening and at what stage they are performed but with capture sharpening, using camera raw 7.1 I get a default setting to capture sharpening of amount 25, radius 1.0 Details 25 and masking 0 - is there anyway to change these preset defaults ? My amoun option doesn't go up to 300 either - only 150 - so have a got the decimal place different in my software ?

Kaye changing the defaults in ACR is a bit obscure. Open an image and change all the adjustment sliders to the positions you want as default. Then select the Presets tab and click on a little symbol to the right of the word presets. This brings up a drop down selection and click on "Save new Camera Raw defaults" towards the bottom of the list.

Dave

[Stagecoach]

Bobo,

All I can say is that I follow the CSGTS (Colin Southern Guide to Sharpening) almost religiously and simply watch for any sign of halos and then pull back.

Grahame

[FrankMi]

Thanks Christina, George. Both of you again highlighted the same issue that Isabel and Andre mentioned. How to tell? Each person has different perceptions. What would be a good middle ground..

'Each person has different perceptions.' That is really the rub isn't it? I have a starting set of settings I use patterned mostly off what I have learned from Colin.

I also have my own way of telling when something I'm working on is 'oversharpened' BUT I would certainly LOVE to hear what other folks use for that criteria. Pretty please?

[Bobobird]

Thanks Dave and Grahame.

Normally I am always afraid of pushing too far. Looks like I have just added another layer of work for the future.

Yes I echo Frank's call.

[dje]

v4 posted.

Used 0.3 / 50%. Marginally "oomphier" compared to #1. This is it?

Bobo I hadn't seen your image 4 before I posted my comments above. It is about right for me, but as others have said, it's a personal preference to some extent.

Dave

[Colin Southern]

I'm interested in this thread - following on from comments you made before on some images I posted. I get the difference between the sharpening and at what stage they are performed but with capture sharpening, using camera raw 7.1 I get a default setting to capture sharpening of amount 25, radius 1.0 Details 25 and masking 0 - is there anyway to change these preset defaults ? My amoun option doesn't go up to 300 either - only 150 - so have a got the decimal place different in my software ?

Hi Kaye,

Just don't sharpen in ACR (I don't). I've recorded an action in Photoshop to apply it at 300 @ 0.3px, so all I do is click one button and "job done"

[Colin Southern]

Each person has different perceptions. What would be a good middle ground.

A BIGGER variable is how they're viewing it; if a down-sampled image isn't being evaluated at 100% then all bets are off as the browser will down-sample it for display, and that changes the sharpening significantly. My bet is that some folks are looking at them at 100% and others are looking at downsized images on their monitors.