Which one is better? Sharpening Comparison

[arith]

Two images both heavily processed: but the first with Topaz sharpening and then continued with a bit of Orton stuff.


In the next I took the above image and created the following levels;

Bright 12 Cont -20
Levels 4 - 1 - 255 Out 11 - 255
Warm 85 33%
Normal 12%
Pin Light 56%
Multiply Gauss 36p 100%
Screen 100%
Screen 100%
Screen 100%
Screen 100%
High Pass 0.24p Overlay
Topaz sharpening above


Cheers

[ScoutR]

#1 by a long shot for me and I love it. When I scrolled down to #2 I thought I was loosing my vision or my glasses had fallen off or I was having a stroke or something.

Wendy

[arith]

cheers Wendy

[arith]

Sorry I just got up off the floor; I was wondering what you mean't by having a stroke, oh dear, never mind, must be all that wine.

[ScoutR]

Why were you on the floor?

[arith]

I was laughing so much. Great reply, it cheered me up no end.

[ScoutR]

Sorry I just got up off the floor; I was wondering what you mean't by having a stroke, oh dear, never mind, must be all that wine.

Arith, I like the first one because it has a nice atmosphere and mood to it and I like what you have done with the processing. The old wood shines and I can read the signs and see all the textures. It has a very nice feel too it, I can imagine being there.

When scrolling to the second one everything became a blur, and in my eyes ruined the shot. I said having a stroke becaue one of the symptoms of a stroke is blurry vision.

Wendy

[revi]

I prefer #1 as well for the total image.
There's a number of details in #2 that seem 'better' than in #1, best seen in the "Fry's Chocolate" display and the boxes behind it: the text and fruit decoration are finer, and seem sharper and more detailed. In other areas #2 seems blurred, making me check my glasses for fingerprints (esp. the counter and the boxes underneath).

On close study, #1 seems a bit 'coarse' especially where lettering is concerned (looks blurred), whereAs #2 has those blurry looking areas. Also, #2 seems deformed wrt #1

Remco

[ScoutR]

I was laughing so much. Great reply, it cheered me up no end.

Oh, thank goodness. After I posted, I thought I should not have been so blunt. I didn't mean it in a bad way because I really love the first shot, but I was afraid you would take it wrong. Glad to know that was not the case.

Wendy

[arith]

I prefer #1 as well for the total image.
There's a number of details in #2 that seem 'better' than in #1, best seen in the "Fry's Chocolate" display and the boxes behind it: the text and fruit decoration are finer, and seem sharper and more detailed. In other areas #2 seems blurred, making me check my glasses for fingerprints (esp. the counter and the boxes underneath).

On close study, #1 seems a bit 'coarse' especially where lettering is concerned (looks blurred), whereAs #2 has those blurry looking areas. Also, #2 seems deformed wrt #1

Remco

#2 is distorted with respect to #1 since I did a tiff which wasn't cropped or anything and I've been working from that since the original is HDR and I don't want to do that again. I think I corrected horizontal perspective more in the second.

Pin light might be making some things look sharper; I'm not even sure what pin light does I just like it, in this case it is not 100%.

I was not going to Orton this but I've got nothing to do so I thought I might see what it looked like, although I wasn't confident it would work.

In another I got exactly what I wanted, I seem to be getting a feeling if it will work or not without really being sure why. You will see the other one another day.

[Wirefox]

Steve

I like them both for different reasons. The light is very subtle. However, I do think No2 would make a cracking shot in monochrome

PS. I got the funny side of the stroke too..but I would wouldn't I

Steve

[arith]

Cheers steve, I don't know about the monochrome thingy cos I'm deliberately avoiding it. I would like it to look dramatic in colour.

[Sahil]

My vote goes to the first shot. Its a great shot. Love the mood & tones!
But I am finding the small reflection at 5 o'clock quite distracting.

[arith]

Yes, I find the reflection distracting, whatever it is.

[Shadowman]

It almost looks like the font size changed in the second image. The Fry's name looks sharp but everything else is distorted.

[arith]

It almost looks like the font size changed in the second image. The Fry's name looks sharp but everything else is distorted.

probably, I don't think it is all that good is it.

[Clactonian]

Oh, thank goodness. After I posted, I thought I should not have been so blunt. I didn't mean it in a bad way because I really love the first shot, but I was afraid you would take it wrong. Glad to know that was not the case.

Wendy

I didn't think anybody took offence on this forum Wendy!!

And to answer Steve's question ... No: 1, for all the reasons above, polite or otherwise.
M

[arith]

Cheers Mike, but I'm a little confused by the title; I can't remember writing 'Sharpening Comparison'.

[ScoutR]

Steve and Steve;

Ok guys I just looked up "having a stroke slang" and now i get it. Silly me, giggle, giggle, blush blush, How old did you say you were, I feel like I am back in high school giggle, giggle, giggle...

Wendy

[arith]

Steve and Steve;

Ok guys I just looked up "having a stroke slang" and now i get it. Silly me, giggle, giggle, blush blush, How old did you say you were, I feel like I am back in high school giggle, giggle, giggle...

Wendy

I'm probably too old for you Wendy, but quickly changing the subject I think this is an example of where Orton works: