Nik pro 3 output sharpener

[Craigie]

I downloaded the Nik collection last week and have been trying out the pro 3 output sharpener on a few images.
The image below is one of these images. I did PP in PS Camera Raw the sharpened in pro 3.
My question being, have I over sharpened the image for viewing on this forum.

[Donald]

Looks perfect to me, Gary.

I use the same tool. Have you slid the sliders back and fore just to see what happens?

[Shadowman]

Different images require different methods, when I first tried the program I felt it was fit only for landscapes. Followed a few tutorials and found that using the control points can give you some custom sharpening techniques. Image looks fine.

[Black Pearl]

Over sharpened for my likes with a grittiness to it and very hard edges.

[rpcrowe]

I would rather see a bit less sharpening.

I use NIK RAW Pre-Sharpening and very little output sharpening. When I do use the NIK output, I tend to moderate it with the sliders quite a bit...

[Black Pearl]

It might be fun to post the file at the size above but with no sharpening and let other members download and add their own.

[rpcrowe]

IMO, images like buildings can stand quite a bit more sharpening than can human hair, animal fur or feathers of birds...

[Craigie]

Thanks to all for your C&C it is much appreciated.

Quoted from Black Pearl last post.
"It might be fun to post the file at the size above but with no sharpening and let other members download and add their own".

Robin, below is the original image with no PP at all.

[Black Pearl]

I much prefer the original as its quite natural and its pretty darn sharp from the go - I tried adding the same output sharpening I typically use on my Fuji files but found I needed a tiny bit more to give it the bite I prefer.



At the end of the day everyone has different tastes so it might be interesting if others jump in and add their own sharpening process to compare.

[DanK]

It's all a matter of taste, but personally, I would aim somewhere in between. The original needs some sharpening, IMHO, to bring out detail in the feathers, but the sharpened one seems a bit oversharpened and unnatural to me.

[Manfred M]

I'll have to be quite frank, as I never use either of the two Nik sharpening functions. I find that both the Unsharp Mask and Smart Sharpen functions in Photoshop work quite well for my work. I did try them both when I got Nik, so I am familiar with what they do, and I personally find that they overautomate the sharpening work and tend to miss by either oversharpening or undersharpening.

When it comes to output sharpening, this is very much device dependent. I pay a lot of attention to how I sharpen for print, as I sharpen differently, depending on the type of paper I use. I sharpen more for for matte papers, less of glossy and somewhere in the middle for luster papers.

For screen output, this is highly variable and totally depends of screen resolution and screen size. Any modern camera with 18+ MP capture will be downsampled to display on a computer screen. Unless you are using a newer 4K screen, you are actually displaying images at around 2MP, so you will get some "natural" sharpening from the downsampling algorithms that will tend to enhance some of the edges. Add to that screen size; I have similar resolutions on my 13" laptop and my 28" desktop, so something I prepare for my desktop, will look oversharpened on my laptop.

So, unless you are planning to print or only look at images on your one computers screen, I would not get too concerned with output sharpening, as you can't control what everyone else sees on their screes.

[mknittle]

The first one works best for me. JMHO.

[Black Pearl]

I'll have to be quite frank, as I never use either of the two Nik sharpening functions. I find that both the Unsharp Mask and Smart Sharpen functions in Photoshop work quite well for my work. I did try them both when I got Nik, so I am familiar with what they do, and I personally find that they overautomate the sharpening work and tend to miss by either oversharpening or undersharpening.

When it comes to output sharpening, this is very much device dependent. I pay a lot of attention to how I sharpen for print, as I sharpen differently, depending on the type of paper I use. I sharpen more for for matte papers, less of glossy and somewhere in the middle for luster papers.

For screen output, this is highly variable and totally depends of screen resolution and screen size. Any modern camera with 18+ MP capture will be downsampled to display on a computer screen. Unless you are using a newer 4K screen, you are actually displaying images at around 2MP, so you will get some "natural" sharpening from the downsampling algorithms that will tend to enhance some of the edges. Add to that screen size; I have similar resolutions on my 13" laptop and my 28" desktop, so something I prepare for my desktop, will look oversharpened on my laptop.

So, unless you are planning to print or only look at images on your one computers screen, I would not get too concerned with output sharpening, as you can't control what everyone else sees on their screes.

This is something I have noticed with my new 5k screen and it is changing the way I process and deal with files. The 16mp images from my Fuji don't even reach the left/right edges when viewed at 100% which is a bit of an eye opener and a bit of a shock to the system. I now find myself editing at 100% but being able to see the entire image which is a rather nice way to work and means global changes can be made more accurately. The flip side is when I down sample for web I end up with a postage stamped size image in the middle of Photoshop which is a little disconcerting.

[Manfred M]

This is something I have noticed with my new 5k screen and it is changing the way I process and deal with files. The 16mp images from my Fuji don't even reach the left/right edges when viewed at 100% which is a bit of an eye opener and a bit of a shock to the system. I now find myself editing at 100% but being able to see the entire image which is a rather nice way to work and means global changes can be made more accurately. The flip side is when I down sample for web I end up with a postage stamped size image in the middle of Photoshop which is a little disconcerting.

The Mac 27" 5K display is 5120 x 2880 = 14.7 MP. That's getting into serious resolution and approaching what we are seeing in print resolution. You are up to almost 218ppi on that screen.

[Black Pearl]

It is a very odd thing to edit on and I had to think hard about it before I bit the bullet but I do like the global 100% view with my Fuji files.

When I win the Lotto and get the new Fuji MF I'll get back to having to 'zoom in' to see an image at 100%

[Brev00]

I very often like to use Nik Viveza prior to Output Sharpening. In this image, I would use Viveza to selectively lower the brightness of some of the white feathers. Sharpening tends to increase brightness a smidge so sharpening overly bright areas can cause retinal damage (for me, I am quite sensitive that way ). Viveza also has a nice structure function which can be used on whatever area one wishes. Viveza also has curves and a number of other sliders that can have a subtle, positive impact on an image if used well. After using Viveza, I will then use Output Sharpening. As in Viveza, I will often use it selectively just on areas that are key points of interest. I would say, in general, 90% Viveza; 10% Output Sharpening. The first image is oversharpened to my eye. I might work on the far feathers more than the near as the softness there seems to attract my attention.