Local sharpening in Lightroom

[davidedric]

Lightroom users will likely know that with the latest CC release, it is possible to sharpen locally in the filters or adjustment brush. There is a hidden sting, as I read in a post in Luminous Landscape.

The question was, given that within the filters and the adjustment brush there is only an Amount for Sharpness, what Radius and Detail values are used?

The answer was, whatever are set in the Detail Panel

Then a follow-up. If I make a local sharpness change, then close the filter or brush, then make a change in the Detail panel, will I affect the local change I have just made?

Answer: Yes.

I've checked this out in lightroomforums, where someone has tried it and confirmed it's correct. This is pretty poor - watch out if you use it.

Dave

[Shadowman]

Lightroom users will likely know that with the latest CC release, it is possible to sharpen locally in the filters or adjustment brush. There is a hidden sting, as I read in a post in Luminous Landscape.

The question was, given that within the filters and the adjustment brush there is only an Amount for Sharpness, what Radius and Detail values are used?

The answer was, whatever are set in the Detail Panel

Then a follow-up. If I make a local sharpness change, then close the filter or brush, then make a change in the Detail panel, will I affect the local change I have just made?

Answer: Yes.

I've checked this out in lightroomforums, where someone has tried it and confirmed it's correct. This is pretty poor - watch out if you use it.

Dave

I assume you are talking about noise reduction, I've been told that noise reduction should be done first then sharpening as you would be sharpening the noise as well, so perhaps there is a reason for the comment being made.

[Dave Humphries]

That's not great Dave, but good for people to know.

John's comment is correct regarding the order of noise reduction, then sharpening being optimal, however ...

I thought the adjustments in LR and ACR were 'parametric', all applied in one calculated lump.

Therefore, (I assume) it won't make any difference if you do the sharpening and noise reduction in LR alone (or ACR) which order you make your adjustments - not sure if anyone has tested that though.

It is for these reasons, and their crude control, that I neither sharpen nor noise reduce in ACR (I don't use LR).
I always do these two steps in PS, where there are far more options of type and control available, not to mention their application via layers and masks to effect localised effects.

[xpatUSA]

I thought the adjustments in LR and ACR were 'parametric', all applied in one calculated lump.

Not sure about that, Dave. Although I am not a PS/LR user, I am a past ACR/Elements user.

In Elements, adjustments are applied to the review image as and when they are made. Therefore, sharpening can be applied several times with an appropriate cumulative effect and can be followed by other adjustments. Then, what gets saved is the review image as-is, IIRC.

As opposed to other editors, e.g. RawTherapee, Sigma Photo Pro, where all adjustments are re-done from scratch in the review image and are applied in a fixed order, including when exporting/saving.

What that means is that, in Elements and other editors like FastStone, repeated applications of sharpening make the image sharper and sharper - but in RawTherapee each application of sharpening changes the 'last sharpen' parameters to the current ones with no cumulative effect.

So what does 'parametric' mean for ACR/LR in this context?

Just curious . . .

[jcuknz]

I am happy to say that subsequent clicks of the sharpening tool are cumulative in PSP unless one clicks on the 'undo' button
Also it only applies to the selected area [ such as eyes whathaveyou ]

[DanK]

Dave,

Thanks for posting. I guess the bottom line is that LR is limited for local adjustments.

In LR, the order of edits doesn't matter. There have been a number of past threads about this. I believe I posted test shots to show this, but I have only a phone with me and can't locate it now

Dan

[davidedric]

Since I started this, I’d like to try and explain further – the original post was meant for Lightroom users, it wouldn’t make much sense to anyone else.

Lightroom is indeed a parametric editor (in the Develop module, it’s ACR with a different UI). In other words, what you see on screen is a Preview of how the image will look when Exported from Lightroom (in the case of RAW images, converted to an RGB file).

Normally, Lightroom adjustments are NOT additive. So if you change exposure, for example, several times, what you will be left with is the last adjustment.

Lightroom does not support layers, and in particular does not support explicit masks. However, it does do masking internally. To take the Adjustment Brush. This allows you to paint an area, a mask, and any adjustments are just applied within that mask. In this case they are additive – a change in Exposure in a brushed area will be added to any global changes.

In the latest CC release of Lightroom, the parameters that can be adjusted within a brushed area have been increased (by the by, the sliders have the same names but may not operate in exactly the same way as global sliders). It is now possible to adjust Sharpness. However, of the three parameters in global adjustments (Amount, Radius and Detail) only amount is available within the brushed area.

So, it seems that while sharpness Amount is additive, Radius and Detail are only global, and will be applied to any Brushed area, irrespective.

I doubt this has much real world significance, but it does seem a strange oversight.

Dave

[Shadowman]

Since I started this, I’d like to try and explain further – the original post was meant for Lightroom users, it wouldn’t make much sense to anyone else.

Lightroom is indeed a parametric editor (in the Develop module, it’s ACR with a different UI). In other words, what you see on screen is a Preview of how the image will look when Exported from Lightroom (in the case of RAW images, converted to an RGB file).

Normally, Lightroom adjustments are NOT additive. So if you change exposure, for example, several times, what you will be left with is the last adjustment.

Lightroom does not support layers, and in particular does not support explicit masks. However, it does do masking internally. To take the Adjustment Brush. This allows you to paint an area, a mask, and any adjustments are just applied within that mask. In this case they are additive – a change in Exposure in a brushed area will be added to any global changes.

In the latest CC release of Lightroom, the parameters that can be adjusted within a brushed area have been increased (by the by, the sliders have the same names but may not operate in exactly the same way as global sliders). It is now possible to adjust Sharpness. However, of the three parameters in global adjustments (Amount, Radius and Detail) only amount is available within the brushed area.

So, it seems that while sharpness Amount is additive, Radius and Detail are only global, and will be applied to any Brushed area, irrespective.

I doubt this has much real world significance, but it does seem a strange oversight.

Dave

Dave,

The thing is, there's only two adjustments in the Detail Panel, noise reduction and sharpness; so as you laid out the "hidden sting" there is only one real problem to consider and that would be further noise reduction. If sharpness is the issue, I would only assume that the previous adjustment (sharpening with the adjustment brush) would be altered. then it doesn't make sense to apply the change in the first place. So if all you are basically doing is removing the previous sharpening then don't do the adjustment or don't make a later change in the Detail Panel.

[Mike Buckley]

I doubt this has much real world significance, but it does seem a strange oversight.

My take is exactly the opposite: I doubt it is an oversight and it has a lot of significance at least for me. One major reason I have not switched to using Lightroom on a regular basis is because sharpening done with complete user's control can't be done selectively. So, thanks for taking the time to point out and fully explain this characteristic.

[DanK]

If I understand correctly what Dave has written (Dave, correct me if I am wrong), the issue is the four sharpening parameters: amount, radius, detail, and masking. John, I don't think this is a reference to noise reduction. The issue, as I understand it, is that if you do a local sharpening with the adjustment brush, the only parameter you can control locally is amount. The radius, detail, and masking parameters applied with the adjustment brush are whatever is applied in the global sharpening. Dave, do I understand this correctly?

I think it is potentially confusing to say that the adjustments are not additive in LR. In two senses, they are. For example, take an image and increase any parameter, say, exposure. Then, do any other adjustment. Finally, to back to exposure, and either increase it further or decrease it. LR will show you two numbers in that editing line. The first is the edit you have just made, and the second is the sum of all exposure adjustments made to that point. So, it is additive, but the net effect is simply that final sum. It makes no difference how many steps you took to get there, or when in the sequence you took them. All that matters is that one final sum.

If I understand correctly, the local adjustments are additive as well. It adds to whatever global edit you have done on any parameter the additional adjustment specified in the adjustment brush dialog.

Re local adjustments: there are plenty of times when I find local adjustments in LR sufficient. I just did a few candid baby shots today, for example, that needed a bit of dodging, and the LR adjustment brush was just fine. However, in many cases, they don't provide enough control, and that is when I move the image int PS or something else.

[Shadowman]

If I understand correctly what Dave has written (Dave, correct me if I am wrong), the issue is the four sharpening parameters: amount, radius, detail, and masking. John, I don't think this is a reference to noise reduction. The issue, as I understand it, is that if you do a local sharpening with the adjustment brush, the only parameter you can control locally is amount. The radius, detail, and masking parameters applied with the adjustment brush are whatever is applied in the global sharpening. Dave, do I understand this correctly?

I think it is potentially confusing to say that the adjustments are not additive in LR. In two senses, they are. For example, take an image and increase any parameter, say, exposure. Then, do any other adjustment. Finally, to back to exposure, and either increase it further or decrease it. LR will show you two numbers in that editing line. The first is the edit you have just made, and the second is the sum of all exposure adjustments made to that point. So, it is additive, but the net effect is simply that final sum. It makes no difference how many steps you took to get there, or when in the sequence you took them. All that matters is that one final sum.

If I understand correctly, the local adjustments are additive as well. It adds to whatever global edit you have done on any parameter the additional adjustment specified in the adjustment brush dialog.

Re local adjustments: there are plenty of times when I find local adjustments in LR sufficient. I just did a few candid baby shots today, for example, that needed a bit of dodging, and the LR adjustment brush was just fine. However, in many cases, they don't provide enough control, and that is when I move the image int PS or something else.

Dan,

That's the only way (sharpening or noise) that could be a concern, I can see how one could be a concern (the noise reduction) but see the other (sharpening) as less of an issue, if the sharpening is undone then why apply it at all. If it's because you can't apply the four parameters (radius, detail, and masking-and I don't see how it's possible to do so with the adjustment brush) then it would seem like a wasted step. Perhaps I'm viewing the concern in the wrong way. By the way, I'm still using LR 4.4, perhaps there is something different in the latest version.

[DanK]

John,

I may be on a different track than Dave, but as I see it, here is the limitation. It has nothing to do with noise reduction. Suppose that you use a global sharpening with the following parameters: amount 50, radius 1.5, detail 35, masking 50. These are arbitrary values, just for illustration. Now suppose that there is an area in the image to which you want to add additional sharpening, so you use the adjustment brush. But suppose that you want that additional sharpening to have a different radius, detail, or masking setting. You can't do it. The adjustment brush will let you add or subtract to the amount, but the other three parameters have to remain the same as in the original, global sharpening. Dave, am I getting your issue correct? Noise reduction doesn't come into this at all. The issue would be there even if you use no noise reduction.


This is entirely different in photoshop, where you can add sharpening of any kind to an area without any use of the parameters applied globally. For example, if you wanted to, you could use high-pass sharpening globally and then smart sharpening or USM in a selected area. Or you could use smart sharpening globally with one radius setting and then locally with a different radius setting. Etc.

Dan

[Shadowman]

John,

I may be on a different track than Dave, but as I see it, here is the limitation. It has nothing to do with noise reduction. Suppose that you use a global sharpening with the following parameters: amount 50, radius 1.5, detail 35, masking 50. These are arbitrary values, just for illustration. Now suppose that there is an area in the image to which you want to add additional sharpening, so you use the adjustment brush. But suppose that you want that additional sharpening to have a different radius, detail, or masking setting. You can't do it. The adjustment brush will let you add or subtract to the amount, but the other three parameters have to remain the same as in the original, global sharpening. Dave, am I getting your issue correct? Noise reduction doesn't come into this at all. The issue would be there even if you use no noise reduction.


This is entirely different in photoshop, where you can add sharpening of any kind to an area without any use of the parameters applied globally. For example, if you wanted to, you could use high-pass sharpening globally and then smart sharpening or USM in a selected area. Or you could use smart sharpening globally with one radius setting and then locally with a different radius setting. Etc.

Dan

Hi Dan,

I see the issue now. I have tried using the adjustment brush for sharpening and a few other adjustments, most seem to stick or do what is needed; the sharpening brush seemed to soon in my workflow so only used it on quick edits. Thanks for the clarification.

[davidedric]

Dave, am I getting your issue correct? Noise reduction doesn't come into this at all. The issue would be there even if you use no noise reduction.

Yes, that's how I see it.

Thanks all for your contributions.

I suspect the same sort of issue may arise in Noise Reduction in the brush and filters panel, where Amount, Detail and Contrast are again reduced to just Amount. But Moire and Defringe appear in those panels, but not in the global adjustments. Need to do some more research!

Dave

[Mike Buckley]

But Moire and Defringe appear in those panels, but not in the global adjustments.

That's probably because there would rarely if ever be a need for using those two tools globally.