5D Users + Edge Sharpening

I'm wondering if any one of you guys using the Canon 5D Mk I have any particular edge sharpening settings you use?

1. All the settings under Adjustments will be stamped, at this point is not possible to select only one adjustment. If you are gonna apply the same settings to few images you can untick the boxes of the adjustments you don't want to copy to other images, then lift the adjustments (only those with the box ticked will be lifted) and stamp it to the others.
2. Edge sharpening is a great tool, the best is to experiment and find the results you like. That depends on many factors as the type of photography, lenses used and even personal taste. Have a look at this document:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304536
3. I don't find noise reduction in aperture any great. Only chroma blur for removing colour noise. At ISO 1600 2.5 setting in chroma blur does the job. Before printing I always bring the image to Photoshop and use Noiseware Professional, which gives great results.

Similar Messages

"Falloff" in edge sharpen...

Is it me, is it my old eyes... Or does the "falloff" slider in edge sharpen not appear to do that much?
I think I'm having some confusion with the edge sharpening in general... If I understand correctly, you should move the first slider all the way to the right, then the second slider to the right until the edges are sharp without introducing sharpening the noise, then the falloff slider (That I can't see doing anything) then back off the first slider to below .50? Is that correct?

And thus the confusion. From the Aperture User Manual (page 462):
*To sharpen an image*:
1 In the Edge Sharpen area of the Adjustments inspector or the Adjustments pane of
the Inspector HUD, +*set the Intensity slider to the maximum value*+ to see the effect of
the operation.
2 Adjust the +*Edges slider so you can see which parts of the image are being sharpened*+.
If possible, adjust the Edges slider so that edges are sharpened, but noise and texture
in the image are not affected.
3 Adjust the Falloff slider so that the edge sizes you want sharpened the most are
accentuated.
4 *+Decrease the Intensity parameter value+* until the sharpening effect is appropriately
subtle. +*Values below 0.5 usually work best*+.
I'm trying to get a good handle on the above, but you think I should set the intensity higher?

Aperture seems to ignore edge sharpening on export

I like this edge sharpening tool in Aperture.
However when I export a picture the export process seems to simply ignore my edge sharpening I made. This is even true when I use the "edit with ..." menu.
Edge sharpening seems also be ignored while printing pictures.
I must say that edge sharpening is quit useless if I can't see the effect in exported or printed versions

jonesmc wrote:
When you're exporting, are you choosing to export "Version"? Otherwise, you're just exporting the original.
I export Versions of corse.
I also think that this is a bug - and a very important one.

Edge sharpening and noise: your settings?

I am experimenting with edge sharpening. I have a couple of questions.
1. How to lift and stamp JUST the edge sharpening? From the HUD it looks like all the adjustment settings get applied? (Do I need to do anything else but highlight the edge sharpening in the HUD before stamping)?
2. What do you like for portraits as a setting in edge sharpening?
3. What settings for noise reduction? My latest shoot has all kinds of noise (concert photography) due to 1600 ISO.
Any advice welcome here! Thanks so much!

1. All the settings under Adjustments will be stamped, at this point is not possible to select only one adjustment. If you are gonna apply the same settings to few images you can untick the boxes of the adjustments you don't want to copy to other images, then lift the adjustments (only those with the box ticked will be lifted) and stamp it to the others.
2. Edge sharpening is a great tool, the best is to experiment and find the results you like. That depends on many factors as the type of photography, lenses used and even personal taste. Have a look at this document:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304536
3. I don't find noise reduction in aperture any great. Only chroma blur for removing colour noise. At ISO 1600 2.5 setting in chroma blur does the job. Before printing I always bring the image to Photoshop and use Noiseware Professional, which gives great results.

Is there any optimal adjustment for Edge Sharpening?

When I mostly worked with PS I used an adjustment for sharpening portraits and another one for landscapes.
I wonder if someone could tell me a general good value for ·Edge Sharpening" with these two options working with Aperture.
Best regards.
iMac Intel Duo 2 Core Mac OS X (10.4.8)

I've saved several settings from which I select:
(weak) 50/33/66, 50/33/99, 50/50/99, 50/66/99 and 66/66/99 (strong).
Generally, on high ISO shots, I use weaker sharpening than on low ISO shots. Portraits also usually want less sharpening than, say, landscapes.
Otherwise I have no real rule of thumb. Depends on the image. I play with the sliders (which work quite well these days on my old G4 powerbook, as long as I don't have shadows / highlights enabled - thanks for that, Joe and team!) until I'm happy in this order: first the top slider, then the second one, and finally the third one.
Cheers,
Karl
Cheers,
Karl

In Aperture, Under "Adjustments" is there any way to permanently and "Edge sharpen" and "Sharpen" to my list, so I don't have to add it everytime?

I am on an Macbook Pro and an Imac with Yosemite 10.10.1 and Aperture 3.6. When I go under adjustments, I always crop, adjust vertical, edge sharpen, and sharpen. Is there a way to add those , so they are listed and I don't have to add them every time? Thanks.

If it is not in the default set then Léonie's screen capture will look like this. In her shot she has the brick as part of her default set so hers says Remove.
Just a minor clarification
regards

Batch edge sharpen or customized sharpen in RAW fine tuning

Do you apply a mild edge sharpen to all your pictures by default or have tweaked the sharpening default default in the 1.1 RAW fine tuning to your likeness or simply stick with the default in the RAW converter and just apply different amount of edge sharpening on an image by image basis?
Peter
Quad G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8) GT 7800

Thanks William.
My question was not primarily, whether you use the defaults for edge sharpen.
Let's explain it a bit more detailed:
Almost all pictures from DSLRs need sharpening to some extend. That basic sharpening usually is done in the RAW converter and can be adjusted with the RAW fine tuning since Aperture 1.1
Since Aperture 1.5 we have the new edge sharpen tool, which is said to give much better results than the old sharpen tool. Looking at the sliders I assume, the sharpening in the RAW fine tuning is done with the same algorithm that is used in the old sharpen tool.
So my idea was, whether it is probably better to trim down or even disable the sharpening in the RAW fine tuning and instead batch apply a small amount of edge sharpen to all my picture. Then tweak the edge sharpen on those pictures that need it.
So far my approach is to use the sharpening in the RAW converter usually set to the Apple default and additionally apply edge sharpen for individual pictures, if I think they need it.
Peter

RAW Fine Tuning Sharpening vs. Edge Sharpening

What is the difference between "Sharpening" under "RAW Fine Tuning," and "Edge Sharpening" ?
I have a Canon EOS 5D, if you have the same camera, do you use the default "RAW Fine Tuning" Sharpening, or do you use different settings?
Thanks,
Toine

I usually apply a bit more than the default of the Raw Fine Tuning Sharpening, until textures look ok and there is not increase in noise.
Then I apply Edge Sharpening, as the name indicates will sharpen just the edges, having little effect on the noise or textures as for example the skin on a portrait.

Howto: Make Edge Sharpen etc. part of the default HUD

Hi all,
To make the new Edge Sharpen control part of the standard HUD:
0) Quit Aperture
1) Go to Library/Application Support/Aperture
2) Copy the file AdjustmentsDefaults.plist to a safe location
3) Open the original AdjustmentsDefaults.plist file by double clicking it. This should launch the Property List Editor with the file loaded
4) Unfold the Properties List nodes
5) Select the last entry in the plist (the one named 5)
6) Click on "New Sibling" in the toolbar
7) Enter RKProSharpenOperation as the value
8) Quit Property List Editor
9) Restart Aperture and enjoy your customized HUD!
Other operations that appear to work are
RKRedEyeOperation (Red Eye)
RKStraightenCropOperation (Straighten)
RKCropOperation (Crop)
RKDustRemovalOperation (Spot and Patch)
RKChannelMixerOperation (Monochrome Mixer)
RKNoiseReductionOperation (Noise Reduction)
RKSharpenOperation (Sharpen)
Sepia and Color Monochrome seem to be handled by parameterized versions of RKImageOperation and I haven't experimented with adding these.
As always; perform experiments like this with care!
Kind regards

that one is already a default ... at least it was for
me after upgrading to 1.5 ...
maybe someone who has the plist in front of them can
give the exact, or else i will when i get home ...
My face is FF0000!! You are right, it is there. I don't believe it was before 1.5 and I missed it.
Thanks!

HUD Display (edge sharpening)

I frequently use the edge sharpening controls. I would like to know if there is a way to keep these controls permanently in the HUD display, along with other frequently used controls such as exposure, contrast, white balance, etc. Unlike the regular sharpening adjustment, I have to select edge sharpening from the HUD drop down menu each time I want to use it. As soon as I move on to another image, it disappears from my HUD window. There must be a way to select frequently used adjustments in the HUD window permanently isn't there? I can't figure out how to do it. I am NOT talking about saving presets. I understand how to do that. This would be a big timesaver.

Steve- I can't thank you enough. This has been bugging me for ages. I just never got around to researching it on the discussion boards til now. I am a bit technically challenged When I opened the AdjustmentsDefaulsts.plist it was opening by default with OmniOutliner. After reading the old threads on this topic I see someone else had the same problem. I went back and opened it with Text Edit and added RKProSharpenOperation to the list and voila! Upon re-launching Aperture the edge sharpen adjustment is permanently in my HUD. To anyone else reading this, you must make sure to enter it EXACTLY the same as the other items on the list, in other words like this:
<string>RKProSharpenOperation</string> The first time I tried I left out the forward slash in the second <string> and it didn't work.

Aperture - Adjustments - Edge Sharpening

Aperture 3- Adjustments - EDGE SHARPEN - I would like to PRE-SET the adjustmnets to Intensity .48, Edges .91 and Falloff .46. How do I lock in these settings? I may change these as I edit, but I would like to start with these on each photo. Thanks - Bob

Go to a photo and then remove all adjustments from it.
Then add an edge sharpen adjustment and dial it in with the settings you want. Then from the effects menu, select "save as effect" and give it a name. Then you can just use that effect on images to make those settings.

Keep edge sharpening tool open?

Is there a way to keep the edge sharpening tool/brick open like the other adjustments. I have to use a keyboard shortcut to bring it up each time I want to use it.

with the edge sharpen brick open, click the gear icon in the upper right and choose "Add to Default Set" ...

Edge Sharpening: Changes Color (?)

In playing with and testing the new edge sharpening functions, I'm finding erratic, weird behavior.
I have found, on several images, that when applying edge sharpening to an image, the color(s) appear to be affected. I guess the best way to describe it is like this: imagine you are working on a photo. Don't change anything yet. Nothing. Open full screen. Scroll the image to a portion in which a dark area or areas are visible. Ideally, you will have a part of an image that also has edges that are to be sharpened.
Now, apply edge sharpening to taste. After that, press M to view the original. In my case, I have found that the color of the dark areas change, when all I've done is add edge sharpening. Specifically, the dark areas appear to be lighter and show more detail (not sharpening detail).
Anyone else?
G5 / DP 1.8 / 4gb RAM / ATI X800 Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Yep. And rebooted, too.
And this is reproducible.
Very odd.
the funny thing is that when applying edge sharpening, the image actually improves in non-sharpened areas. Specifically, more color detail is visible in areas otherwise too dark or showing too much black contrast.
So... applying edge sharpening gives what appears to be a more accurate render of the image, where the "dark" portions now are slightly less dark, and show greater detail.
Note: calibrated monitor. Apple 23" Cinema Display.

Edge Sharpening

Just purchased Aperture to replace iView which is getting long in the tooth now. Using Photoshop from iView I had several actions which I obtained including a couple of very good sharpeners. I would like to stay within the Aperture environment to save time. Being lazy I looked for some presets/action equivalents to sharpen and cannot find any.
I said i was lazy, are there some pre-sets or does one of the experts have a preset they can recommend?

"Pop" may not be actual sharpness but often what I perceive as sharpness (outside of loupe inspection) is saturation and contrast. I tend to use Definition, Vibrancy and a touch of Contrast (I use Canon RAW's for 15Mpix).
Frequent settings I use are around 1.04 Sat, 0.12 Vibr,+50% Def. +0.3 Contrast. Save as a preset. Bear in mind the lighting nature (harsh mid morning daylight, morning haze), type of scene and your style means these may be truly useless settings.
As for edge sharpness, again you should really play around, and determine whether for print (and size) or web/monitor. My hard edge preset is 0.67 Intensity, 0.55 Edge, 0.47 Falloff. It seems to work for most of my prints for landscapes and wildlife. Again, this is on RAW (I use less RAW sharpening).
Play around and see what works .... go on, be creative!

Favorite Sharpening Methods?

Copied from the archive, with BUMP replies weeded out. ======================================================= Lindas Graphics - 04:29am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific Discussion on favorite sharpening methods in Photoshop. I normally use Unsharp Mask, Amount: 100 / Radius: .5 / Threshold: 0 -- followed by Fade with Luminosity Mode. Recently I've started experimenting with the Hi Pass Filter. There seems to be many different tutorials on sharpening, each one's method slightly different. I'd be interested in other user's favorite methods and why. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 05:52am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#1 of 68) At the pro level ... well then the answer must be "it depends". Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 07:32am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#2 of 68) This is a good starting point: http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 07:41am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#3 of 68) Mathias, Thanks for that link. Another good article from Bruce. But I'm a little puzzled by "Figure 1a: Unsharpened" which to me is clearly sharpened already. Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 10:32am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#4 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 11:34am PST Mathias: I remember reading that tutorial in the past but forgot where it was. Bruce Fraser is one of my favorites when it comes to Photoshop. I've printed the tutorial along with the follow-up one he did. I'm glad you posted the link. Thanks! I'm interested in the methods you people use for sharpening. Does anyone else use the High Pass Filter? <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 11:30am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#5 of 68) Linda, Yes, I do. I use the overlay sharpening technique. Sometimes. It really depends on the subject. For web photos, I often use PS´ USM with a setting of 50, 0.3, and then re-apply it often four times. If you don´t know what the right radius setting should be, first, pull up the amount setting to max, then adjust the radius setting untill the right details are sharpened, then lower the amount to a reasonable setting - and then use 25% of this amount and re-apply four times. Works for me! See http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ for various techniques I´ve recorded, including the overlay sharpening technique. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 12:47pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#6 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 01:48pm PST I use a technique that has delivered reliable results for me, for what it's worth... I convert the image to lab mode, and make my adjustments on the the Lightness layer (a copy really) to avoid color shifts. I basically select the glowing edges, apply a gaussian blur filter, then basically, apply the Unsharp filter. When it's finished, I convert back to RGB mode. Its not original, it's a modification of an action found in PhotoScan Factory actions found in Xchange. But it produces VERY good results for me on MOST of the stuff I do. I hope this thread keeps going as sharpening is of huge iterest to me since my work requires the removal of moire patterns. [edit] By the way, i use the high pass filter followed by fade on the textual portions of my images (black text on a white background) that have been overblurred by the gaussian blurr filter. It produces some pretty nice results for me. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:55pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#7 of 68) Now this is getting interesting. I appreciate the elaboration. I look forward to trying your techniques and variation. Thanks Mathias and Tony. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> glen deman - 07:45pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#8 of 68) You can also sharpen individual channels. Try sharpening (or unsharpening, I guess it is!) the "weakest" channel of the image, or the channel with the least detail. I've found that this will often be the red channel; when you do this, you sharpen the image but avoid some of the pitfalls of sharpening, like halos and artifacts. I think I saw this in Photoshop Artistry. Glen <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Danny Raphael - 09:34pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#9 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 10:37pm PST Here's a no cost edge sharpening action that's pretty nifty. Scroll down to the BOTTOM of this page at FredMiranda.com: http://www.fredmiranda.com/Action_profilesPage/index.html <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 10:57pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#10 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 11:58pm PST Danny, I would say LOW cost, not NO cost - he's charging $8.50 for the action. Personally, I'll pass. Thanks for the link though. Peace, Tony [Edit] DOH! I didn't scroll down far enough, there's a "lite" version offered for free below the one he charges for. My mistake, sorry. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mark Reynolds - 05:25am Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#11 of 68) Seems fairly pointless - I can almost tell you what the $8.50 will get; you: Make an edge mask first using the Find Edges filter on an alpha channel. This can then be blurred slightly and Levels adjusted. Duplicate the base layer and run unsharp mask to taste on the duplicate. Load the alpha channel into a layer mask on the Sharpened layer. This will sharpen the edges only - very useful for skin tones where you don't want any accentuation of noise and texture. The layer mask can also be adjusted (Blur and Levels again, and Maximum ) to enhance or spread the sharpening. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 06:09am Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#12 of 68) I´m one of those that believe that Freds actions, although valuable, are not worth the money. But I know that a lot of people are willing to pay. Actually, seeing Fred charging for his actions was a major motivator for me to develop the digital deluxe action set. - Which is free ofcourse. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Don Stefanik - 12:02pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#13 of 68) Edited: 24-Jul-2002 at 01:04pm PST And a great set of actions they are Mathias... I use them quite a bit. They are one of my favorites. Don <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 02:13pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#14 of 68) Thanks Don, Only the de-noise actions are my own invention, the rest are variations of known techniques, invented by others. I just recorded and published them. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 04:43pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#15 of 68) An off-the-wall sharpening approach that I use very occasionally. Sometimes a subject (especially plain tones) can stand strong amounts of only the light or the dark part of the USM halo. You can separate them thus: Duplicate the layer and USM the copy (you can go slightly harder than normal). Duplicate the copy, and change the blend mode of one copy to lighten, and the other copy to darken. At 100% opacity for both copies, you have the normal effect of the USM, but by varying the opacity of these layers, you can separate the amount of lighter halo and darker halo the subject gets, allowing slightly more USM than normal without it looking too crunchy or noisy. I think I read this in Dan Margulis' Book Professional Guide to Color Correction, which has an excellent chapter on sharpening with heaps of other ideas. Warm regards, Dean [Posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 05:38pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#16 of 68) Very cool ideas people. I'm enjoying this and keeping notes for when I can stop long enough to experiment on different kinds of images. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:17pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#17 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 01:28pm PST I'm back and want to keep this thread alive. Re-reading your posts and think your ideas so far are interesting. The link Mathias provided also covers Noise. I think dealing with Noise goes right along with the topic of Sharpening. I welcome your comments on Noise as well. I personally try to deal with Noise channel by channel. As a rule the blue channel seems to have the most Noise. But what I find tricky is when the sharpest channel (usually green) ends up having the most Noise, which does happen sometimes. My method is to use the Median Filter on the Noisy Channel then Fade. If you do it channel by channel you cannot use Luminosity Mode though -- one advantange of correcting all the channels together. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 01:07pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#18 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 02:27pm PST Re Post #5: <<For web photos, I often use PS´ USM with a setting of 50, 0.3, and then re-apply it often four times. If you don´t know what the right radius setting should be, first, pull up the amount setting to max, then adjust the radius setting untill the right details are sharpened, then lower the amount to a reasonable setting - and then use 25% of this amount and re-apply four times. >> Mathias: On Web photos I'm curious why you do the sharpening in quarters instead of all at once. I assume that you do not use the Fade filter combined with Luminosity Mode. I am experimenting on a low res photo of an older person I recently took with my digital camera. I tried it both ways (all at once and in 4ths) but cannot seem to see any difference between the two methods. By the way, I'm not trying to find holes in your methods, on the contrary I think they are interesting and I'm enjoying the challenge. Oh yes, and another thing -- Your method of determining Radius is helpful. I tried that and came up with the same setting you did: .3 <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 01:44pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#19 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 02:46pm PST Okay Tony, it's your turn. ) I'm slowing making my way down the list. Re: Post #6 << I convert the image to lab mode, and make my adjustments on the the Lightness layer (a copy really) to avoid color shifts. I basically select the glowing edges, apply a gaussian blur filter, then basically, apply the Unsharp filter. When it's finished, I convert back to RGB mode. >> Question: When you select the glowing edges, does that mean you run the Glowing Edges Filter first and then select the highlights? If so, how do you determine what settings to use for the Glowing Edges Filter? And then how do you determine what settings you use for the Gaussian Blur Filter? Just curious. One more thing: I assume you use this Lightness Channel Copy just as a means of loading the edges for the final step of running unsharp mask on the original channel, followed by deletion of this channel copy. Is this correct? <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 02:47pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#20 of 68) Linda, I have also developed a noise action that basically medians the L+a+b channels manually, and applies a 'manual' edgemask. This action demands more selective mask editing, and more user input, but it is 'stepless' - usable on all ISO speeds. This action, which is just a classic median de-noiser with a twitch, is not published yet. The subject of noise is pretty big.. It is also interesting. Sharpen in four steps Try it on another image. You really need different sharping for each image. Examine at 200%. The edge halos in the stepped version is less pronounced. You can use this stepping method on all the classic filters and techniques for a better resampled pixel. I assume that you do not use the Fade filter combined with Luminosity Mode. I used to do that. Now I sharpen a merged layer and put this in Luminosity mode to avoid any color shifted pixels, and to keep everything neat and un-destructed. If I want, I apply an edgemask to this layer. There´s another method I use. This method is called <a href=http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/USM.HTM>Real Unsharp Mask</A> (I´ve got it actionized as well). It is very nice for certain subjects and contrast enhancements. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 02:55pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#21 of 68) Mathias, There was some mention of actions that you have for download. I'd like to try them. Where are they please? Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 03:30pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#22 of 68) Here: http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ (I think its listed in my profile.) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:40pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#23 of 68) Mathias: I tried your "Real Digital Unsharp Masking" technique on the same photo I was experimenting with previously. I found at the end that the photo was considerably darker so I duplicated the original untuched layer, selected Screen Mode and lowered the opacity to 70%. Above this layer is the layer with the mask applied in Luminosity Mode, opacity lowered to 50%. Below both layers is an original untouched layer. The results are good but different from the other (4 Times) method. I can't tell which is better. Both are good. I enjoyed seeing how Unsharp Masking works this way. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 03:43pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#24 of 68) The luminosity switching is the big problem with RUSM. You can control it by experimenting with setting the brightness / contrast levels, and/or with a final curves adjustment layer. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 03:46pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#25 of 68) Mathias, I very much like the Real Unsharp Mark... like sharpening and a contrast mask in one. Linda... after hard unsharp masking, I sometimes attack the worst of the noise in shadows with the "Dust and Scratches" (D&S) filter on a duplicate of the image. Use a small radius (1-2) and very high threshold (30-60) to just zap those pixels that have gone way out of line. Use a luminosity mask to just let the D&S layer show through in the shadows, otherwise the image will be softened overall. It's similar to your median approach. Dean [posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:50pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#26 of 68) I'll give it a try Dean. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 04:09pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#27 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 05:13pm PST Dean: That did not work very well on the image I'm experimenting with. It seems those settings do not produce a very good blur. It actually seems to produce extra artifacts. I'm just wondering why you might have chosen those settings. When I use D&S with Radius 1, Amount 1, Luminosity Mode, Opacity 50% -- It seems to work better. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 05:59pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#28 of 68) Thank you, Mathias. --Victor <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 08:37pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#29 of 68) Linda, Ah... it's probably due to differences in medium. I'm using 4000dpi scans of 35mm film, often fairly grainy film. Your digital image probably starts off with less noise, so hard USM doesn't give you the wacky pixels that I get. Play with whatever settings seem to work best for you. Good luck! Dean [posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 10:12pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#30 of 68) Hi Carol... RE: "Question: When you select the glowing edges, does that mean you run the Glowing Edges Filter first and then select the highlights?" Yes. "If so, how do you determine what settings to use for the Glowing Edges Filter? And then how do you determine what settings you use for the Gaussian Blur Filter? Just curious." I found an action in Adobe XChange called PhotoScan Factory that contains this technique - it's not my own. I have had to tweak the glowing edges and gaussian blur settings from time to time, but in general through trial an error have found a range of values that I like. So, I run the action with my tweaked settings, if I don't like it, I run it with the dialog boxes enabled and adjust more. In general my settings for glowing filters are: Edge Width 3 Edge Brightness 8 Smoothness 5 Then a gaussian blur of 0.9 to 1.1 is run on the lightness channel copy that had the Glowing Edges Filter run on it. Then the channel is loaded as a selection, then deleted. Finally, the glowing edges/blurred selection is Sharpened at about 180 with a radius of 2.1 and threshold of 0. After this is done, of course, it's just clean up with the lightness channel deleted and converted back to RGB mode. RE" One more thing: I assume you use this Lightness Channel Copy just as a means of loading the edges for the final step of running unsharp mask on the original channel, followed by deletion of this channel copy. Is this correct?" Exactly. I have found that by doing it this way, I experience little or no color shift as compared to most USM techniques. It is fair to point out the following. Most of my images have moire patterns - it's the nature of my work. So prior to running the sharpening procedure, the images are heavily blurred using gaussian blur (heavily =1.1 - 1.3). Since that is the case, the sharpening process I use *may* be too strong for some, but is just about perfect (or as perfect as you can get until I read another cool method in this thread <grin>) for me. I'll be reading with interest... Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:07am Jul 31, 2002 Pacific (#31 of 68) Dean: You are probably right on target there. I'm playing around with an image that I've downsized to 72dpi. It does make a difference. Thanks! Tony: Thanks for all the helpful information. I've got work to do this morning but will come back to this conversation again when I get a breather. This is quite interesting. Linda -- not Carol ) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 01:00pm Jul 31, 2002 Pacific (#32 of 68) Linda, Linda -- not Carol ) Geeze, I'm sorry - don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that. You may herein refer to me as Dolt. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:36am Aug 1, 2002 Pacific (#33 of 68) LOL -- No problem Tony. I can't wait to come back to this topic as soon as I catch up on other things and can give it more attention. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lexorin - 03:12pm Aug 1, 2002 Pacific (#34 of 68) Edited: 01-Aug-2002 at 04:17pm PST Just noticed someone already mentioned this... Convert image to LAB mode. Select the lightness channel in the channels palette. Run unsharp mask as you normally would. Revert image back to original mode. Working on just the lightness channel in lab mode keeps unsharpmask from sharpening your color values. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:57pm Aug 4, 2002 Pacific (#35 of 68) It never hurts to restate something like that Lexorin. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 08:21am Aug 6, 2002 Pacific (#36 of 68) Keeping this thread alive. Will be doing some intensive repairs to my hard drive, followed by reinstallation of software. I hope to come back to this thread when things are back to normal. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 12:18am Aug 8, 2002 Pacific (#37 of 68) I found aPDF about different methods of sharpening: http://www.dimage.org/NewFiles/J.%20Winberg%20Sharpening%20Presenta tionText.pdf <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 08:20am Aug 9, 2002 Pacific (#38 of 68) Pierre, That was a very nice contribution. I happen to be saving this thread as sharpening methods are extremely important. Thanks. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Enrique Ivern - 11:07am Aug 9, 2002 Pacific (#39 of 68) Pierre, thanks...always useful to have a brief cookbook to consult! Not clear if you're the author...if so, thanks again, if not, thanks to the unknown author... Cheers. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> vEnrique Ivern - 03:11pm Aug 12, 2002 Pacific (#40 of 68) Pierre, I just printed the whole document....thanks also then to Jack Winberg, the author. Cheers, <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 12:34am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#41 of 68) I said I've found it using Google... I'm still in the learning curve of PS (as EVERY user is ) Maybe one day... <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 01:06am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#42 of 68) I have to say that I am having some VERY nice results from the Digital Deluxe action set, specifically the contrast masking, edge masking, and high pass sharpening. The high pass sharpening adds that "ever so little" tweak I need after my normal sharpening methods. Great Actions, Thanks! <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 08:37am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#43 of 68) You´re welcome, Tony. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 02:59pm Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#44 of 68) I'm so glad to see that you all are still participating. This is a nice group. Thank you Pierre for the PDF link. I'm keeping busy and so unable to continue experimenting for now, but like Tony I'm keeping this thread for future use and reference. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:11pm Aug 23, 2002 Pacific (#45 of 68) Things have been hectic at this end. I have no idea when I'll have time to get back to this topic. Still, I guess I'll try to keep it alive since it contains so much good stuff. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> dave milbut - 07:20pm Aug 23, 2002 Pacific (#46 of 68) I've got Kai's PT v6... has anyone had any luck with the equalizer there for sharpening? Everything seems so drastic when I use it, alot of contrast sharpening. I'd like to hear from some people who've had more luck than me 'cuz I think I'm missing something there. Thans for a great thread, also saving. dave <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:48pm Aug 25, 2002 Pacific (#47 of 68) I've got KPT 6 too but never used the Equalizer. I too would be interested in comments on it. So far I just keep doing the UnSharp Mask method. It works well for most normal sharpening. Specialized sharpening seems good for special needs. Noise reduction is often just as important as sharpening. What's challenging is when you have to deal with both noise and sharpening on the same photo. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> dave milbut - 02:08pm Aug 25, 2002 Pacific (#48 of 68) For noise reduction (and addition), I'm really digging the beta of AlienSkin's Image Doctor. I can't wait for the full package to be released. You can get the beta from their site and play around with it. dave <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:59am Aug 26, 2002 Pacific (#49 of 68) Thanks Dave. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 11:05am Sep 9, 2002 Pacific (#50 of 68) I found this pretty nifty trick from Russell Browns Tips site. A very nice technique that plays as a QT movie. http://www.russellbrown.com/body.html Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 04:36am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#51 of 68) Hi Tony. I've been busy dealing with computer problems in the middle of trying to keep my work going. I've ordered a new Mac (ducking) so hopefully I will have more time when things start running smoothly again. Thanks for the link. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 04:39am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#52 of 68) Linda, I too am keeping a keen eye on this thread and in fact, have made a PDF out of it since I will have to review it from time to time. Since the work we do involves removing Moire patterns, sharpening is of paramount interest <wink>. Get your new system, have some fun, then... back to work for you! <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:17am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#53 of 68) Yes Sir! ) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 03:55am Sep 17, 2002 Pacific (#54 of 68) Again other Sharpening tutorials (not new) at: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/smart_sharp.shtml an High-Pass one: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/high-pass-sharpening.sh tml <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:35am Oct 1, 2002 Pacific (#55 of 68) Thanks Pierre. I'm swamped. I'll be back again. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:39am Nov 28, 2002 Pacific (#58 of 68) Edited: 28-Nov-2002 at 06:42am PST Maybe some of you might like to comment on an opposite problem. I've just done a photo correction. That part was easy. Dealing with noise is the hard part. The noise is out of control. I've tried targetting individual channels as well as going into Lab Mode but not getting the best results so far. Here is a <A HREF=http://www.graphicspalmbeach.com/porfolio/burttracyjohn.html><FO NT COLOR=ROYALBLUE>link to the page</A> I posted. You can see the noise in the enlarged eyes portion. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 04:16am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#59 of 68) Edited: 29-Nov-2002 at 04:17am PST Lindas, When I hear noise, I think about Mathia's Digital deluxe toolbox... http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ there are other non-freeware package for this task... try also the demo from http://www.neatimage.com/ (stand alone program) Hey, who's the guy next to Tracy and John? (on the sharpening side, I found this: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/PSTV_downloads.html while searching for de-noising actions) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 05:39am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#60 of 68) Thanks Pierre. In this case, I think NeatImage is the better choice. De-noise Deluxe is aimed at digital noise, and this seems more like film grain to me. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:41am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#61 of 68) Edited: 29-Nov-2002 at 06:42am PST Pierre: Thank you for the links. << Who's the guy next to Tracy and John? >> You got it! ) Mathias: You're right, it is film grain. I had only a photo to work with. It was scanned on the Epson Expression 1680 at a higher resolution and then sized. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:27pm Dec 15, 2002 Pacific (#62 of 68) Edited: 15-Dec-2002 at 07:27pm PST I've done more practice on noise by taking the channels apart, giving each one a major overhaul, then pasting them over the original document's channels. Trouble is, what looks good on screen looks not so wonderful when printed. I really want to improve my own PS techniques rather than use a plug-in. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 10:21am Jan 10, 2003 Pacific (#63 of 68) Edited: 10-Jan-2003 at 10:22am PST I think Mathias' actions are pretty impressive. It's worth posting his LINK again. One day I plan to study each action step in detail. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 09:44am Jan 11, 2003 Pacific (#64 of 68) I agree with Lindas - Mathias' actions are part of a process that I use daily; although I've tweaked them a bit, his concept in sharpening, edge enhancement, and contrast masking is quite sweet. When I first downloaded his actions, I posted in a thread my thanks to him as once of them was the finishting touch that I needed. It's worth repeating the "Thanks!" Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Tenna Sutfin - 09:40am Jan 28, 2003 Pacific (#65 of 68) Can you send me your action for ridding yourself of moire patterns? [email protected] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> End of Archived Thread

Copied from the archive, with BUMP replies weeded out. ======================================================= Lindas Graphics - 04:29am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific Discussion on favorite sharpening methods in Photoshop. I normally use Unsharp Mask, Amount: 100 / Radius: .5 / Threshold: 0 -- followed by Fade with Luminosity Mode. Recently I've started experimenting with the Hi Pass Filter. There seems to be many different tutorials on sharpening, each one's method slightly different. I'd be interested in other user's favorite methods and why. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 05:52am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#1 of 68) At the pro level ... well then the answer must be "it depends". Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 07:32am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#2 of 68) This is a good starting point: http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 07:41am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#3 of 68) Mathias, Thanks for that link. Another good article from Bruce. But I'm a little puzzled by "Figure 1a: Unsharpened" which to me is clearly sharpened already. Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 10:32am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#4 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 11:34am PST Mathias: I remember reading that tutorial in the past but forgot where it was. Bruce Fraser is one of my favorites when it comes to Photoshop. I've printed the tutorial along with the follow-up one he did. I'm glad you posted the link. Thanks! I'm interested in the methods you people use for sharpening. Does anyone else use the High Pass Filter? <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 11:30am Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#5 of 68) Linda, Yes, I do. I use the overlay sharpening technique. Sometimes. It really depends on the subject. For web photos, I often use PS´ USM with a setting of 50, 0.3, and then re-apply it often four times. If you don´t know what the right radius setting should be, first, pull up the amount setting to max, then adjust the radius setting untill the right details are sharpened, then lower the amount to a reasonable setting - and then use 25% of this amount and re-apply four times. Works for me! See http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ for various techniques I´ve recorded, including the overlay sharpening technique. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 12:47pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#6 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 01:48pm PST I use a technique that has delivered reliable results for me, for what it's worth... I convert the image to lab mode, and make my adjustments on the the Lightness layer (a copy really) to avoid color shifts. I basically select the glowing edges, apply a gaussian blur filter, then basically, apply the Unsharp filter. When it's finished, I convert back to RGB mode. Its not original, it's a modification of an action found in PhotoScan Factory actions found in Xchange. But it produces VERY good results for me on MOST of the stuff I do. I hope this thread keeps going as sharpening is of huge iterest to me since my work requires the removal of moire patterns. [edit] By the way, i use the high pass filter followed by fade on the textual portions of my images (black text on a white background) that have been overblurred by the gaussian blurr filter. It produces some pretty nice results for me. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:55pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#7 of 68) Now this is getting interesting. I appreciate the elaboration. I look forward to trying your techniques and variation. Thanks Mathias and Tony. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> glen deman - 07:45pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#8 of 68) You can also sharpen individual channels. Try sharpening (or unsharpening, I guess it is!) the "weakest" channel of the image, or the channel with the least detail. I've found that this will often be the red channel; when you do this, you sharpen the image but avoid some of the pitfalls of sharpening, like halos and artifacts. I think I saw this in Photoshop Artistry. Glen <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Danny Raphael - 09:34pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#9 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 10:37pm PST Here's a no cost edge sharpening action that's pretty nifty. Scroll down to the BOTTOM of this page at FredMiranda.com: http://www.fredmiranda.com/Action_profilesPage/index.html <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 10:57pm Jul 23, 2002 Pacific (#10 of 68) Edited: 23-Jul-2002 at 11:58pm PST Danny, I would say LOW cost, not NO cost - he's charging $8.50 for the action. Personally, I'll pass. Thanks for the link though. Peace, Tony [Edit] DOH! I didn't scroll down far enough, there's a "lite" version offered for free below the one he charges for. My mistake, sorry. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mark Reynolds - 05:25am Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#11 of 68) Seems fairly pointless - I can almost tell you what the $8.50 will get; you: Make an edge mask first using the Find Edges filter on an alpha channel. This can then be blurred slightly and Levels adjusted. Duplicate the base layer and run unsharp mask to taste on the duplicate. Load the alpha channel into a layer mask on the Sharpened layer. This will sharpen the edges only - very useful for skin tones where you don't want any accentuation of noise and texture. The layer mask can also be adjusted (Blur and Levels again, and Maximum ) to enhance or spread the sharpening. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 06:09am Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#12 of 68) I´m one of those that believe that Freds actions, although valuable, are not worth the money. But I know that a lot of people are willing to pay. Actually, seeing Fred charging for his actions was a major motivator for me to develop the digital deluxe action set. - Which is free ofcourse. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Don Stefanik - 12:02pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#13 of 68) Edited: 24-Jul-2002 at 01:04pm PST And a great set of actions they are Mathias... I use them quite a bit. They are one of my favorites. Don <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 02:13pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#14 of 68) Thanks Don, Only the de-noise actions are my own invention, the rest are variations of known techniques, invented by others. I just recorded and published them. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 04:43pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#15 of 68) An off-the-wall sharpening approach that I use very occasionally. Sometimes a subject (especially plain tones) can stand strong amounts of only the light or the dark part of the USM halo. You can separate them thus: Duplicate the layer and USM the copy (you can go slightly harder than normal). Duplicate the copy, and change the blend mode of one copy to lighten, and the other copy to darken. At 100% opacity for both copies, you have the normal effect of the USM, but by varying the opacity of these layers, you can separate the amount of lighter halo and darker halo the subject gets, allowing slightly more USM than normal without it looking too crunchy or noisy. I think I read this in Dan Margulis' Book Professional Guide to Color Correction, which has an excellent chapter on sharpening with heaps of other ideas. Warm regards, Dean [Posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 05:38pm Jul 24, 2002 Pacific (#16 of 68) Very cool ideas people. I'm enjoying this and keeping notes for when I can stop long enough to experiment on different kinds of images. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:17pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#17 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 01:28pm PST I'm back and want to keep this thread alive. Re-reading your posts and think your ideas so far are interesting. The link Mathias provided also covers Noise. I think dealing with Noise goes right along with the topic of Sharpening. I welcome your comments on Noise as well. I personally try to deal with Noise channel by channel. As a rule the blue channel seems to have the most Noise. But what I find tricky is when the sharpest channel (usually green) ends up having the most Noise, which does happen sometimes. My method is to use the Median Filter on the Noisy Channel then Fade. If you do it channel by channel you cannot use Luminosity Mode though -- one advantange of correcting all the channels together. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 01:07pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#18 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 02:27pm PST Re Post #5: <<For web photos, I often use PS´ USM with a setting of 50, 0.3, and then re-apply it often four times. If you don´t know what the right radius setting should be, first, pull up the amount setting to max, then adjust the radius setting untill the right details are sharpened, then lower the amount to a reasonable setting - and then use 25% of this amount and re-apply four times. >> Mathias: On Web photos I'm curious why you do the sharpening in quarters instead of all at once. I assume that you do not use the Fade filter combined with Luminosity Mode. I am experimenting on a low res photo of an older person I recently took with my digital camera. I tried it both ways (all at once and in 4ths) but cannot seem to see any difference between the two methods. By the way, I'm not trying to find holes in your methods, on the contrary I think they are interesting and I'm enjoying the challenge. Oh yes, and another thing -- Your method of determining Radius is helpful. I tried that and came up with the same setting you did: .3 <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 01:44pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#19 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 02:46pm PST Okay Tony, it's your turn. ) I'm slowing making my way down the list. Re: Post #6 << I convert the image to lab mode, and make my adjustments on the the Lightness layer (a copy really) to avoid color shifts. I basically select the glowing edges, apply a gaussian blur filter, then basically, apply the Unsharp filter. When it's finished, I convert back to RGB mode. >> Question: When you select the glowing edges, does that mean you run the Glowing Edges Filter first and then select the highlights? If so, how do you determine what settings to use for the Glowing Edges Filter? And then how do you determine what settings you use for the Gaussian Blur Filter? Just curious. One more thing: I assume you use this Lightness Channel Copy just as a means of loading the edges for the final step of running unsharp mask on the original channel, followed by deletion of this channel copy. Is this correct? <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 02:47pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#20 of 68) Linda, I have also developed a noise action that basically medians the L+a+b channels manually, and applies a 'manual' edgemask. This action demands more selective mask editing, and more user input, but it is 'stepless' - usable on all ISO speeds. This action, which is just a classic median de-noiser with a twitch, is not published yet. The subject of noise is pretty big.. It is also interesting. Sharpen in four steps Try it on another image. You really need different sharping for each image. Examine at 200%. The edge halos in the stepped version is less pronounced. You can use this stepping method on all the classic filters and techniques for a better resampled pixel. I assume that you do not use the Fade filter combined with Luminosity Mode. I used to do that. Now I sharpen a merged layer and put this in Luminosity mode to avoid any color shifted pixels, and to keep everything neat and un-destructed. If I want, I apply an edgemask to this layer. There´s another method I use. This method is called <a href=http://www.astropix.com/HTML/J_DIGIT/USM.HTM>Real Unsharp Mask</A> (I´ve got it actionized as well). It is very nice for certain subjects and contrast enhancements. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 02:55pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#21 of 68) Mathias, There was some mention of actions that you have for download. I'd like to try them. Where are they please? Regards, Victor Lee. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 03:30pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#22 of 68) Here: http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ (I think its listed in my profile.) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:40pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#23 of 68) Mathias: I tried your "Real Digital Unsharp Masking" technique on the same photo I was experimenting with previously. I found at the end that the photo was considerably darker so I duplicated the original untuched layer, selected Screen Mode and lowered the opacity to 70%. Above this layer is the layer with the mask applied in Luminosity Mode, opacity lowered to 50%. Below both layers is an original untouched layer. The results are good but different from the other (4 Times) method. I can't tell which is better. Both are good. I enjoyed seeing how Unsharp Masking works this way. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 03:43pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#24 of 68) The luminosity switching is the big problem with RUSM. You can control it by experimenting with setting the brightness / contrast levels, and/or with a final curves adjustment layer. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 03:46pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#25 of 68) Mathias, I very much like the Real Unsharp Mark... like sharpening and a contrast mask in one. Linda... after hard unsharp masking, I sometimes attack the worst of the noise in shadows with the "Dust and Scratches" (D&S) filter on a duplicate of the image. Use a small radius (1-2) and very high threshold (30-60) to just zap those pixels that have gone way out of line. Use a luminosity mask to just let the D&S layer show through in the shadows, otherwise the image will be softened overall. It's similar to your median approach. Dean [posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:50pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#26 of 68) I'll give it a try Dean. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 04:09pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#27 of 68) Edited: 30-Jul-2002 at 05:13pm PST Dean: That did not work very well on the image I'm experimenting with. It seems those settings do not produce a very good blur. It actually seems to produce extra artifacts. I'm just wondering why you might have chosen those settings. When I use D&S with Radius 1, Amount 1, Luminosity Mode, Opacity 50% -- It seems to work better. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> pleader - 05:59pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#28 of 68) Thank you, Mathias. --Victor <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Dean Holland - 08:37pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#29 of 68) Linda, Ah... it's probably due to differences in medium. I'm using 4000dpi scans of 35mm film, often fairly grainy film. Your digital image probably starts off with less noise, so hard USM doesn't give you the wacky pixels that I get. Play with whatever settings seem to work best for you. Good luck! Dean [posted from Australia] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 10:12pm Jul 30, 2002 Pacific (#30 of 68) Hi Carol... RE: "Question: When you select the glowing edges, does that mean you run the Glowing Edges Filter first and then select the highlights?" Yes. "If so, how do you determine what settings to use for the Glowing Edges Filter? And then how do you determine what settings you use for the Gaussian Blur Filter? Just curious." I found an action in Adobe XChange called PhotoScan Factory that contains this technique - it's not my own. I have had to tweak the glowing edges and gaussian blur settings from time to time, but in general through trial an error have found a range of values that I like. So, I run the action with my tweaked settings, if I don't like it, I run it with the dialog boxes enabled and adjust more. In general my settings for glowing filters are: Edge Width 3 Edge Brightness 8 Smoothness 5 Then a gaussian blur of 0.9 to 1.1 is run on the lightness channel copy that had the Glowing Edges Filter run on it. Then the channel is loaded as a selection, then deleted. Finally, the glowing edges/blurred selection is Sharpened at about 180 with a radius of 2.1 and threshold of 0. After this is done, of course, it's just clean up with the lightness channel deleted and converted back to RGB mode. RE" One more thing: I assume you use this Lightness Channel Copy just as a means of loading the edges for the final step of running unsharp mask on the original channel, followed by deletion of this channel copy. Is this correct?" Exactly. I have found that by doing it this way, I experience little or no color shift as compared to most USM techniques. It is fair to point out the following. Most of my images have moire patterns - it's the nature of my work. So prior to running the sharpening procedure, the images are heavily blurred using gaussian blur (heavily =1.1 - 1.3). Since that is the case, the sharpening process I use *may* be too strong for some, but is just about perfect (or as perfect as you can get until I read another cool method in this thread <grin>) for me. I'll be reading with interest... Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:07am Jul 31, 2002 Pacific (#31 of 68) Dean: You are probably right on target there. I'm playing around with an image that I've downsized to 72dpi. It does make a difference. Thanks! Tony: Thanks for all the helpful information. I've got work to do this morning but will come back to this conversation again when I get a breather. This is quite interesting. Linda -- not Carol ) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 01:00pm Jul 31, 2002 Pacific (#32 of 68) Linda, Linda -- not Carol ) Geeze, I'm sorry - don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that. You may herein refer to me as Dolt. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:36am Aug 1, 2002 Pacific (#33 of 68) LOL -- No problem Tony. I can't wait to come back to this topic as soon as I catch up on other things and can give it more attention. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lexorin - 03:12pm Aug 1, 2002 Pacific (#34 of 68) Edited: 01-Aug-2002 at 04:17pm PST Just noticed someone already mentioned this... Convert image to LAB mode. Select the lightness channel in the channels palette. Run unsharp mask as you normally would. Revert image back to original mode. Working on just the lightness channel in lab mode keeps unsharpmask from sharpening your color values. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:57pm Aug 4, 2002 Pacific (#35 of 68) It never hurts to restate something like that Lexorin. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 08:21am Aug 6, 2002 Pacific (#36 of 68) Keeping this thread alive. Will be doing some intensive repairs to my hard drive, followed by reinstallation of software. I hope to come back to this thread when things are back to normal. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 12:18am Aug 8, 2002 Pacific (#37 of 68) I found aPDF about different methods of sharpening: http://www.dimage.org/NewFiles/J.%20Winberg%20Sharpening%20Presenta tionText.pdf <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 08:20am Aug 9, 2002 Pacific (#38 of 68) Pierre, That was a very nice contribution. I happen to be saving this thread as sharpening methods are extremely important. Thanks. Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Enrique Ivern - 11:07am Aug 9, 2002 Pacific (#39 of 68) Pierre, thanks...always useful to have a brief cookbook to consult! Not clear if you're the author...if so, thanks again, if not, thanks to the unknown author... Cheers. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> vEnrique Ivern - 03:11pm Aug 12, 2002 Pacific (#40 of 68) Pierre, I just printed the whole document....thanks also then to Jack Winberg, the author. Cheers, <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 12:34am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#41 of 68) I said I've found it using Google... I'm still in the learning curve of PS (as EVERY user is ) Maybe one day... <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 01:06am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#42 of 68) I have to say that I am having some VERY nice results from the Digital Deluxe action set, specifically the contrast masking, edge masking, and high pass sharpening. The high pass sharpening adds that "ever so little" tweak I need after my normal sharpening methods. Great Actions, Thanks! <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 08:37am Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#43 of 68) You´re welcome, Tony. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 02:59pm Aug 13, 2002 Pacific (#44 of 68) I'm so glad to see that you all are still participating. This is a nice group. Thank you Pierre for the PDF link. I'm keeping busy and so unable to continue experimenting for now, but like Tony I'm keeping this thread for future use and reference. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:11pm Aug 23, 2002 Pacific (#45 of 68) Things have been hectic at this end. I have no idea when I'll have time to get back to this topic. Still, I guess I'll try to keep it alive since it contains so much good stuff. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> dave milbut - 07:20pm Aug 23, 2002 Pacific (#46 of 68) I've got Kai's PT v6... has anyone had any luck with the equalizer there for sharpening? Everything seems so drastic when I use it, alot of contrast sharpening. I'd like to hear from some people who've had more luck than me 'cuz I think I'm missing something there. Thans for a great thread, also saving. dave <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 12:48pm Aug 25, 2002 Pacific (#47 of 68) I've got KPT 6 too but never used the Equalizer. I too would be interested in comments on it. So far I just keep doing the UnSharp Mask method. It works well for most normal sharpening. Specialized sharpening seems good for special needs. Noise reduction is often just as important as sharpening. What's challenging is when you have to deal with both noise and sharpening on the same photo. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> dave milbut - 02:08pm Aug 25, 2002 Pacific (#48 of 68) For noise reduction (and addition), I'm really digging the beta of AlienSkin's Image Doctor. I can't wait for the full package to be released. You can get the beta from their site and play around with it. dave <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 03:59am Aug 26, 2002 Pacific (#49 of 68) Thanks Dave. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 11:05am Sep 9, 2002 Pacific (#50 of 68) I found this pretty nifty trick from Russell Browns Tips site. A very nice technique that plays as a QT movie. http://www.russellbrown.com/body.html Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 04:36am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#51 of 68) Hi Tony. I've been busy dealing with computer problems in the middle of trying to keep my work going. I've ordered a new Mac (ducking) so hopefully I will have more time when things start running smoothly again. Thanks for the link. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 04:39am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#52 of 68) Linda, I too am keeping a keen eye on this thread and in fact, have made a PDF out of it since I will have to review it from time to time. Since the work we do involves removing Moire patterns, sharpening is of paramount interest <wink>. Get your new system, have some fun, then... back to work for you! <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:17am Sep 14, 2002 Pacific (#53 of 68) Yes Sir! ) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 03:55am Sep 17, 2002 Pacific (#54 of 68) Again other Sharpening tutorials (not new) at: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/smart_sharp.shtml an High-Pass one: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/high-pass-sharpening.sh tml <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:35am Oct 1, 2002 Pacific (#55 of 68) Thanks Pierre. I'm swamped. I'll be back again. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:39am Nov 28, 2002 Pacific (#58 of 68) Edited: 28-Nov-2002 at 06:42am PST Maybe some of you might like to comment on an opposite problem. I've just done a photo correction. That part was easy. Dealing with noise is the hard part. The noise is out of control. I've tried targetting individual channels as well as going into Lab Mode but not getting the best results so far. Here is a <A HREF=http://www.graphicspalmbeach.com/porfolio/burttracyjohn.html><FO NT COLOR=ROYALBLUE>link to the page</A> I posted. You can see the noise in the enlarged eyes portion. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Pierre Courtejoie - 04:16am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#59 of 68) Edited: 29-Nov-2002 at 04:17am PST Lindas, When I hear noise, I think about Mathia's Digital deluxe toolbox... http://www.2morrow.dk/75ppi/coolpix/actions/ there are other non-freeware package for this task... try also the demo from http://www.neatimage.com/ (stand alone program) Hey, who's the guy next to Tracy and John? (on the sharpening side, I found this: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/PSTV_downloads.html while searching for de-noising actions) <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Mathias Vejerslev - 05:39am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#60 of 68) Thanks Pierre. In this case, I think NeatImage is the better choice. De-noise Deluxe is aimed at digital noise, and this seems more like film grain to me. Mathias <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 06:41am Nov 29, 2002 Pacific (#61 of 68) Edited: 29-Nov-2002 at 06:42am PST Pierre: Thank you for the links. << Who's the guy next to Tracy and John? >> You got it! ) Mathias: You're right, it is film grain. I had only a photo to work with. It was scanned on the Epson Expression 1680 at a higher resolution and then sized. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 07:27pm Dec 15, 2002 Pacific (#62 of 68) Edited: 15-Dec-2002 at 07:27pm PST I've done more practice on noise by taking the channels apart, giving each one a major overhaul, then pasting them over the original document's channels. Trouble is, what looks good on screen looks not so wonderful when printed. I really want to improve my own PS techniques rather than use a plug-in. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Lindas Graphics - 10:21am Jan 10, 2003 Pacific (#63 of 68) Edited: 10-Jan-2003 at 10:22am PST I think Mathias' actions are pretty impressive. It's worth posting his LINK again. One day I plan to study each action step in detail. <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> YrbkMgr - 09:44am Jan 11, 2003 Pacific (#64 of 68) I agree with Lindas - Mathias' actions are part of a process that I use daily; although I've tweaked them a bit, his concept in sharpening, edge enhancement, and contrast masking is quite sweet. When I first downloaded his actions, I posted in a thread my thanks to him as once of them was the finishting touch that I needed. It's worth repeating the "Thanks!" Peace, Tony <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> Tenna Sutfin - 09:40am Jan 28, 2003 Pacific (#65 of 68) Can you send me your action for ridding yourself of moire patterns? [email protected] <hr SIZE="1" NOSHADE> End of Archived Thread

5D Users + Edge Sharpening

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for