ACR sharpening range vs. PS4 sharpening range

I'd like to do my capture sharpening in ACR in Bridge then do output in PS4, but the Bridge Amount range of 1-150, while PS has an Amount range of 1-500; and an even more dramatic difference in "pixel" settings (ACR has .5 - 3.0 while PS has 1-64). I've read that the ACR sharpening is basically USM (unsharp mask), so is there any way to correlate these numbers? For instance, if I apply 150 in ACR does that equal 150% in PS or is the scale different so that ACR's 150 = PS 500% for an incremental increase of 3.3,
Brian

There are thousand ways of image sharpening and for ideal result there is no
such thing as 'one way fits all'
I'm no expert but don't think you can compare the two ways, better use them
both together, some even use three ways of sharpening and those ways are
again different for various purposes.
Try also pixelgenius.com
And here are two from the 2.6 million results after Google search about
Image sharpening :
http://www.pixelgenius.com/tips/schewe-sharpening.pdf
http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=608637&seqNum=4
I've read that the ACR sharpening is basically USM (unsharp mask), so is
there any way to correlate these numbers?

Similar Messages

LR/ACR Sharpenning

At a recent educators conference there was a bit of a disagreement over sharpening in LR or ACR (assuming a primarily RAW workflow). The presenters stance was don't use it, jump out into PS and do your sharpening there. I took the other stance, but thought I'd see what others more knowledgeable thought.
Their concerns seem to center around three topics.
1) They believe the sharpening algorithms in LR/ACR are designed for capture sharpening and not primary sharpening. I could see this thinking for ACR - which started life as a front end for PS - but LR is a stand alone. In any event they should be the same algorithms.
2) They believe that sharpening in LR or ACR would constitute a violation of the "thou shalt sharpen last" commandment. My understanding is that since we are still within the less destructive RAW area, this should not be a problem.
3) They don't like/understand the vagaries of LR's Print Sharpening Settings What do Low, Medium, High, Glossy and Matt mean in reality?
What say you more knowledgeable people?

>At a recent educators conference there was a bit of a disagreement over sharpening in LR or ACR
It never ceases to amaze me that EDUCATORS are not better educated, ya know?
Since CR 4.1 and LR 1.1, the capture sharpening was substantially improved (IMHO to be best of breed) to the point that one would be foolish to eschew CR/LR over doing so in Photoshop. And now, in Lightroom 2.0 (not Camera Raw) we have the ability to do really good (IMHO) output sharpening (which does indeed come relatively last), so one wonders what these so called "educators" are talking about?
Yes, sharpening "for effect" is still a really useful function for Photoshopwhen you need it. The "creative sharpening" part of the Sharpening Workflow as espoused by the late Bruce Fraser can only lightly be done in Lightroom 2. The local brush for sharpening and un-sharpening (Hamburg claims un-sharpen isn't really a blur) is very limited when sharpening for effect.
It should be noted that Bruce and I both had a bit to do with the sharpening in CR/LR so you may want to take what I say with a grain of salt (don't make me wrong though :~)

Photoshop CC Smart Sharpen vs. LR/ACR Sharpening

Could someone articulate for me how Photoshop CC's Smart Sharpening differs from Lightroom (and ACR's) sharpening in the Detail panel? Do they approach sharpening differently? Is one more powerful than the other, and if so, in what way? Are there particular circumstances under which you find it worthwhile to use SS rather than stay with LR/ACR? (I do see that SS allows one to control the effect in highlights and shadows.)
I have generally been sticking with LR sharpening, but want to be able to answer these questions intelligently (and be aware of circumstances where I should take the time to open PS and use SS).
Thank you!

Laura Shoe wrote:
Could someone articulate for me how Photoshop CC's Smart Sharpening differs from Lightroom (and ACR's) sharpening in the Detail panel?
The approach is potentially similar if you have SS set to fix lens blur and you have LR's Detail slider moved way over to the right (+50 and above). When set up like that, both tools can do deconvolution type sharpening...
Booth tools can set the sharpening radius and both have an amount (although I doubt the numbers relate–prolly a different scale).
With SS the sharpening is applied on the color data while in LR the sharpening is only on the luminance data. With SS on a layer, you can set the layer blend to luminance. With SS you can roll off and control the sharpening contours of the highlights and shadows. In LR the sharpening is preset to roll off the highlights and shadows so there's no user control.
In SS you can (in CC) can adjust noise reduction while sharpening. In LR you can as well. The only thing that SS can do that LR can't is to resharpen for motion blur. However, SS is pretty weak in that department compared to the new anti-shake filter.
Which one is better? 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. I would not leave LR simply to run SS on an image and be forced to work on a rendered image. I would do all the capture sharpening in LR and would only use SS if I was going to go into Photoshop anyway and even then, more likely to use SS for effect sharpening not capture sharpening.

Does ACR 100 sharpening = PS4 100 sharpening amount?

I'd like to do my capture sharpening in ACR in Bridge then do output in PS4, but the Bridge sharpening Amount range is 1-150, while PS has an Amount range of 1-500; and an even more dramatic difference in "pixel" settings (ACR has .5 - 3.0 while PS has 1-64). I've read that the ACR sharpening is basically USM (unsharp mask), so is there any way to correlate these numbers? For instance, if I apply 150 in ACR does that equal 150% in PS or is the scale different so that ACR's 150 = PS 500% for an incremental increase of 3.3?
Brian

BALawson wrote:
Does ACR 100 sharpening = PS4 100 sharpening amount?
No...

Capture SHARPENING in ACR?????????????

Capture Sharpening in ACR???
OK, after going back and forth with Jeff Shewe a few times here on the forums (and doing some tests and a variety of additional study) I am becoming converted to believing that some "Capture Sharpening" in ACR (before interpolating a file substantially in PS) when done RIGHT can actually improve the
ultimate quality potential of a large, high res print. Believe me, this is new thinking to me. I would like this thread to be anything and everything, any experienced folks would like to throw into the mix regarding ACR "Capture Sharpening."
Questions, observations, links to more information...
This is because I want to absolutely master it and the knowledge of it. I'll start out below with some questions and concerns. Thank you anyone who contributes in any way.
Mark

Jeff, I have questions for you, if you don't mind...?
OK, I spent the last two days re-reading Bruce Fraser's wonderful book "Real World Image Sharpening" two
more times (I am certified to teach it now!) in attempt to make sure I have every word of the book understood and mastered in my head and in practice (with a twist of my own here and there).
But after reading it, a general question seems to nag me. Since sharpening does not really add any true
detail to a print, but instead, increases the
perception or illusion of detail by artificially increasing contrast in the form of halos specifically at
edges...
And because your general recommendation to sharpen at 100% view, just
until the image looks "good" without doing any damage to the image, or over-sharpening...
(BTW, for some peoples info, I make large to very large, high end, high res, continuous tone, landscape gallery prints)...
I am having a hard time understanding the
threshold of "damage" to do (or not to do) to an image file in ACR, by essentially increasing contrast halos, which in of themselves, it seems, are a sort of "damage"
if you will?
Maybe there is a book(s) or article(s) or something out there that can help me figure out how to take "Capture Sharpening" right up to its limitation without going over??? I guess I'm needing more
detailed explanation about how to figure out this threshold?
Another question...?
Can or does ACR sharpening (or is there a way in ACR sharpening) constrain the sharpening to specific tonal ranges (like when we use USM on a layer with the "blend if" sliders set to protect the top highlight and bottom shadow tones)?This allows the image to handle more sharpening with less damage.
The reason I ask, is because my main concern with "Capture Sharpening" is that I might take the haloing to a certain level, which may end up
limiting the amount of additional sharpening I can do effectively (without damaging the image) in PS after up-sizing, because the halos have reached towards, or close to black and white... (hopefully I can find a better way to re-word that last sentence)...
Sorry if I am asking too many questions... But that is one reason for forums, right, to mull over and learn about issues? I admit, I am an obsessive quality freak with my prints (anyone hear of Christopher Berkett? - I consider myself, sort of, in the same vein as him in terms of the technical quality of prints he strives to make) and I am always on a constant search for as close to perfection as possible, even if it pains me (yet, it is a pleasure!). I know its a sickness, but an enjoyable one!

Output sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and Photoshop CS5

Output sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and Photoshop CS5
I want to do two-pass sharpening - capture and output - with output capture done just before I print. I do the initial (capture) sharpening in the ACR Detail/Sharpening panel, with Amount slider set to, for example, 100. Then, I open the image to PS CS5 as a Smart Object, and use layers and masks for further editting.
My question is, can I go back to ACR for the final (output) sharpening pass? When I re-open the file in ACR, the Sharpening Amount slider is back to zero, but the other three sliders are still at the settings I used at the start of the process, i.e., the capture sharpening. If I again set the Amount slider to a positive value, then again open the image in PS for printing, will my second pass through the ACR Sharpening panel take effect - will it accumulate on top of the initial sharpening?
By the way, the reason I want do output sharpening in ACR rather than, say, PS Unsharp Mask, is so I can use the Masking slider in ACR, which is much easier than the comparable techniques available in PS. I am aware that some say you should not do any masking for the output sharpening. I'd like to though.
Thanks for ideas.

This is pretty much the way I do it, and I also always found ACR sharpening superior to anything in Photoshop. There is the "sharpen for output" in ACR, but you have little control over it.
The tricky part is feeding the file through ACR a second time. I don't think re-opening the Smart Object will do anything more than you could have done the first time. I do it with a rendered TIFF, and have an intricate set of actions that I run in the Image Processor Pro. It's a mess, and you don't want to know.
The frustrating part is how to action ACR. I just can't figure it out. It'll work, and then I have to change some setting and the action stops working. I suspect you need a script, but so far I haven't found any.
So I've come to a compromise: I first process to TIFF in a temp folder, then I bulk open them in ACR to sharpen, then a second process to finish up.
For less critical files I have a sharpening action that comes close, involving edge masks and blend ifs, using smart sharpen which tends to preserve edges better than unsharp mask, and with less accumulation of noise.
Bottom line: I'm also very interested in further comments to this. BTW, I recently bought Lightroom 4, so maybe there is a posibility using that in a mixed workflow.

ACR 4.41 capture sharpening

Hi I have a question for the experts here. I have XP SP3 PSCS3 ACR 4.41 I am learning Raw with the wonderful Real World Camera Raw with CS3 by Bruce Fraser and Jeff Schewe.
In the book it is recommended to do my capture sharpening with ACR. Currently I have been using the excellent Photokit Sharpener (1.2.6) plug in for PS,after finishing all of my editing in Raw and converting to PSD. Can anyone suggest equivalent settings in ACR 4.41
Amount radius, detail masking options.
for each option in the digital hi-Res capture sharpening set?
superfine, narrow, medium and wide edge
I have an idea that Jeff Schewe might be involved in Photokit too??
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Kind regards
Geoff

>No, there really is no set of settings since it depends on the source capture and the subject matter...the best bet is to make it look "good" at 100%...
It seems strange to me that useful presets are possible with PKSharpener but not with the new ACR sharpening work flow, since both are based on the same principles: Bruce Fraser's sharpening methods.
While some degree of fine tuning is always desirable, Jeff does give some suggestions for landscape and portrait sharpening presets, both in the ACR with PSCS3 book (pages 170-184) and in the Camera Raw tutorial. I think these are for Canon 1DsMII resolution.
In his seminal sharpening book (Image Sharpening with CS2), Bruce Fraser discusses in some detail the settings for source (radius according to camera MP count and amount according to the strength of the blur filter). He also discusses sharpening for subject content in some depth. The OP implied high resolution, so Jeff's suggestions would be a good starting point in building presets for a given camera and subject matter, and the theoretical basis given in Bruce's book goes a long way into how to make rational adjustments.

Sharpening - DPP vs ACR

I just started this thread over on fredmiranda.com regarding a comparison I have done of sharpening in Canon's Digital Photo Professional and Adobe's Capture Raw. I thought some of you, particularly Canonites, might find it helpful. I would also appreciate any comments or corrections from the experts out there. Here is the link (by the way, I have no monetary interest in Fred's site - I just usually hang out there and I'm too lazy to copy/paste everything over here):
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/595717
In addition to the thread, I would also just like to say that I appreciate the efforts of Thomas Knoll and his team as well as to whatever influence Jeff Schewe and the Pixel Genius guys have had. ACR continues to show important improvements and it can't be an easy job keeping up with the advances in digital photography.
With every complement has to come a request :) so I will also throw in some future feature requests that occurred to me while writing up the post above:
- Please enable sharpen-enabled views at less than 100% (and make them carry over to the high-quality preview in Bridge, too. I know that those views, as in PS, are not perfect but they are helpful in giving you a hint of overall sharpness. I think it would also make it a little easier to use the Alt-Masking function, too.
- I think it may be time to consider a radius of less than 0.5. Bruce Fraser recommended 0.4 for cameras over 11 mega-pixels and new cameras like the Canon 1ds3 are way over that.
- This may create more complexity than it's worth but you might consider adding a "highlight/shadow protection" slider that would optionally remove the halo dampening. It would violate 3-pass sharpening doctrine but it would probably make some DPP-sharpening aficionados happy.
Anyway, thanks again.
Dennis

> I have no particular interest in posting to a thread elsewhere...
No problem. I didn't expect anybody here to have to go to the other thread to post a response. Here is fine.
> I suggest reading ABOUT CAMERA RAW 4.1
Actually, I read your article right after you published it but I hadn't checked it recently. Regarding gaps in my ACR sharpening knowledge, I admitted to some of those in the post - particularly exactly HOW ACR does some of the things it does and also the behavior of the Detail slider. I notice that at the time you wrote the article you linked, you admitted not understanding all of the internals of it either :). I find the "halo dampening" of the Detail Slider to really be secondary to the way it emphasizes or de-emphasizes soft edges and fine detail. It also appears to me that ACR is always doing some level of "blend-if"-like protection of highlights and shadows, regardless of how the detail slider is set. I plan on picking up your book while I am back in the States over Christmas so maybe I will find some additional info there.
> Why, enabling sharpening previews for under 100% will be inaccurate. Why would you want inaccurate?
I am sure my reasons won't be convincing for you but here they are:
* So I have a constant visible reminder that I have sharpening engaged (instead of waiting until I have it imported into PS)
* So ACR's behavior is consistent with PS, which does provide the sharpening views at less than 100%
* So I have an inaccurate but better than nothing way of judging overall sharpness of the image. In my mind, I would equate it to something like Soft Proofing. I wouldn't call Soft Proofing "accurate" either but I can understand how some people, with a little effort and practice, can take it to the point where if they see "Y" in soft proofing, they are fairly confident that they will get something close to "X" in the final print. It may be innacurate but maybe it can be innaccurate in a sufficiently consistent way that it is still useful.
> Testing showed it wasn't needed...so if you want it, you'll have to show why it's needed.
I'll take your word for it. It just seemed that based on Mr. Fraser's observations that more mega-pixels = smaller radius that 0.5 might start being a little large and might limit detail extraction for cameras like the 5D, 1ds3, etc.. There is a lot of debate right now around the strength of the AA filter on the 1Ds3 and that is what got me thinking about it.
> Again, why? You can already ruin images easily enough . . .
Yep. I basically agree with you. That is why I had the lukewarm qualifier there. Mainly I was thinking that it could provide "training wheels" for people coming from DPP. It also might help reduce the jaggies on straight line diagonals that I thought might be at least partly due to the dampening of sharpening in the highlights and shadows (like Mr. Fraser's blend-if technique). Not really compelling reasons to add additional complexity but that was what was going through my mind.
Anyway, thanks for responding Jeff.

PhotoKit Sharpener or ACR?

Hi All:
Ive been trying out PhotoKit sharpener and so far Im impressed with its
performance. But I have a question about how it compares with the sharpener
in the latest version of Raw Converter. I know that the sharpener in RC is
meant to be a capture sharpener, but does anyone have an opinion on which
is better RCs or PhotoKit sharpener capture sharpener? At this point I
cant make up my mind.
John Passaneau

PhotoKit sharpener has three main components according to the sharpening methods Bruce Fraser developed: capture, creative, and output. The capture round of sharpening includes sharpening for source (camera MP count, anti-aliasing filter, etc) and image content (high-, mid- and low frequency). Many photographers use this round of sharpening to create a master image for later use.
The creative sharpening has tools applied selectively to portions of the image--e.g. sharpening brushes, depth of field, smoothing, etc. They must be applied individually and with good judgement to the image and can not be automated.
Output sharpening is not image or source dependent, but is determined by the image size and resolution, the type of output device (half-tone, continuous tone, injket, etc) and the paper type (glossy, matte, etc). You can try to do this on your own or with other tools available on the net, but Bruce did a great deal of testing to get the optimum numbers and this information is proprietary.
The new ACR sharpening features were developed in conjunction with Bruce Fraser and Jeff Schewe and apply the concept of capture sharpening to ACR. I don't know which capture sharpening approach is better, but, considering their source, I would expect them to be similar. The ACR sharpening integrates better into the work flow and is metadata based--you don't have to store a separate image with the capture sharpening.
Even if you use the ACR sharpening, you would probably find the creative and output modules of PhotoKit useful.

What is the best workflow for Ultimate Sharpening w PSE 8?

I shoot a lot of flowers close up and also birds. Both have lots of detail, feathers or stamen, so I rely heavily on sharpening. With birds, sometimes they are flying or distant or both which makes it challenging to get the pics sharp. Recently I have learned more about sharpening and now I am suffering from, "The more I know, the more I know I don't know." Also, some of my information is based on rumor and I would really appreciate any advice. How about if I discuss my workflow and ask some questions here and there.
I shoot RAW with a Canon 7D and I almost always downsize my pics to nnnn x 1080 for this conversation, lets assume I always do this downsizing. I've heard that downsized pics should never be sharpened until after they are downsized. Is this true? Should I set all of the ACR sharpening sliders to zero? Should I also keep the Clarity slider low in ACR or is it more mid-tone contrast and less sharpening? Is there another way to improve Clarity in PSE, not ACR?
When I am done with ACR and open in Elements, the first thing I do is crop and resize using Image, Resize, Bicubic Sharper. Then I fix blemishes. Next I select out the subject(s) and adjust with Color Curves and then Luminous Sharpening which seems to give me better results than Enhance- Adjust Sharpness. (After two years of using Elements I just found this Luminous sharpening and it is so good. I sure wish I would have notice that in Brundage's book earlier. I makes me wonder what else I am missing.) After the Luminous Sharpening should I try High Pass sharpening additionally or any other kind of sharpening? Are there any rules of thumb on when what type of sharpening works best in which application? For example, I heard another rumor that sharpening highlights or dark shadows just increases noise. Is there a good way to handle those situations, like select them out or use a special blend mode?
After I am done with the subject, I usually inverse to the background and de-noise and/or blurr and desaturate to punch up the subject.
Is full Photoshop required to get the best sharpening tools or is the sharpening similar and other aspects are more powerful? I use so little of Elements 8 that I would assume and hope that Photoshop or Lightroom would be overkill at this point.
Thank you for reviewing this! If you can think of any way I could improve I would really appreciate any comments.
Doug

Hi Barbara,
I am humbled to be communicating with someone who wrote such and incredible book! Ok, enough blathering.
This will also answer Andrewzaye's question about output.
Maybe I shouldn't be resampling but here is my rationale. Most of my best pics I like to show occasionally on my HTDV which has a resolution of 1920x 1080. I resample my pics to get them down to that 1080 vertical resolution so that they will fit the native resolution of the screen. (The sides often don't extend the full 1920 but I don't have a problem with the black space on the sides.) This is based on my believe that images on LCDs look best at the LCDs native resolution (and I like to think I know about this because, as a sales mgr for Toshiba, I used to sell notebook computer LCDs by the tens of thousands to big computer companies.) Sometimes I resample and downsize again to email pics as n x 680. It seems to work fine with decent results but I am certainly open to suggestion.
If I eventually decide to print out a photo, it will be to hang on a wall and for that I save the original CR2 file and the post ACR dng files. If I like something enough to print it, I don't mind editing it again and making sure I am getting it as good as possible. Of course I would keep as much resolution as possible for printing.
Ok, those are my excuses. I would love to hear your thoughts on my sharpening questions.
Doug

Can I see sharpening detail like I can in Camera Raw?

A book I have on Camera Raw says that I can preview which areas are being affected when sliders for sharpening are moved by holding down the option key (Mac) and then moving the slider for radius, detail, masking. This shows a window that is gray with just the areas being affected by sharpening showing. Is this feature available in Lightroom?

It works exactly like in camera RAW. Just follow this sequence: Zoom in 1:1 on an area of interest (the B&W-type preview does not work in zoomed-out views), hold you option key and (while holding the key) slide the sliders in sharpening back and forth. You will get the exact same view as you see in ACR.
sharpening box says 'reset sharpening' - what does that mean?)
If you click it, the sharpening will reset to the default. You can do this in all the sections of Develop. Handy if you only want to reset a single section. You can always double click on the name of the slider to have just that slider reset to default.
Is there a video tutorial that shows what I should be seeing on screen?
I'm sure there are. A quick google found me the following screenshots of it in action: http://x-equals.com/blog/?p=1792

Fraser/Schewe RWCR Book - Sharpening Question

Real World ACR > Great book, good explanations. Compiling questions as I read and re-read. Need sharpening workflow guidance. Let's say I am working on an NEF file that ultimately I want to upsample or crop/upsample in Photoshop. Should I sharpen both in the ACR image detail adjustment phase and then do an USM in photoshop again when I am ready to save my final edit? What effect does upsampling in Photoshop have on image adjustments done in ACR?
MacBook Pro, OS 10.4.11, Nikon D300 NEFs, ACR 4.3, PS-CS3

>Pretty sure sharpening is done before the down sample in Camera Raw in the pipeline and the down sample is a Lanczos algorithm (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanczos_algorithm for geek explanation) which has a "degree" of sharpening in it.
Jeff,
Your Wikipedia link is indeed very geeky--It talks about recovering
Eigenvalues, but doesn't even mention resampling. Perhaps this link is more appropriate
Lanczos Resampling.
I have no idea whether ACR sharpens before or after resampling, but to sharpen before resampling seems counterintuitive, since it is often advised to sharpen after resampling to offset the loss of sharpness occasioned by the resampling. With significant downsampling the sharpening halos would be resampled out of existence. Perhaps the Lanczos algorithm obviates these concerns.

Photoshop plugin to sharpen Lumix FX30 photos

I thought I saw a plugin advertised on the web that uses the optic specifications of specific cameras (including the FX30) to sharpen the images taken with them. I've been googling all day but can't seem to find it again. Was I dreaming?

Hudechrome wrote:
I like ACR Sharpen better than DXO. For openers, you have to convert to something other than the native RAW to use DXO. OTOH, if you want a one stop (click!) correction DXO is pretty good.
JJ: But what a point and shoot!
Larry, as far as I could determine, that camera doesn't have a raw capability.

PixelGenius Photokit Sharpener Activation

Has anyone successfully activated photokit sharpener (1.2.6) using Photoshop CS3 and Leopard? I complete the activation process and get a successful install message box, but when I try to use the plugin I get the message the software must be activated. I have redownloaded the plugin, am using the current esellerate program, deleted preferences, everything. I tried everything Pixelgenius support suggested, but no luck. TIA

PhotoKit sharpener has three main components according to the sharpening methods Bruce Fraser developed: capture, creative, and output. The capture round of sharpening includes sharpening for source (camera MP count, anti-aliasing filter, etc) and image content (high-, mid- and low frequency). Many photographers use this round of sharpening to create a master image for later use.
The creative sharpening has tools applied selectively to portions of the image--e.g. sharpening brushes, depth of field, smoothing, etc. They must be applied individually and with good judgement to the image and can not be automated.
Output sharpening is not image or source dependent, but is determined by the image size and resolution, the type of output device (half-tone, continuous tone, injket, etc) and the paper type (glossy, matte, etc). You can try to do this on your own or with other tools available on the net, but Bruce did a great deal of testing to get the optimum numbers and this information is proprietary.
The new ACR sharpening features were developed in conjunction with Bruce Fraser and Jeff Schewe and apply the concept of capture sharpening to ACR. I don't know which capture sharpening approach is better, but, considering their source, I would expect them to be similar. The ACR sharpening integrates better into the work flow and is metadata based--you don't have to store a separate image with the capture sharpening.
Even if you use the ACR sharpening, you would probably find the creative and output modules of PhotoKit useful.

Nikon D5100 and D700, CS5, ACR 6.4.1: not enough memory when I convert many nef in jpg

The discution was ( and is) also here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/3781380#3781380

Using ACR from PS3 or PS4, no problems. Using ACR 6.4.1. and making a batch convert, from nef to jpg ( or to other formats) I receive "not enough memory" sometimes, and all the times when I select reducing noise and lens corrections. It happen also when I try to transform only one nef to jpg.
I have win 7, i7, memory in triple channel, the system on a SSD, the scratch disk of win on another free SSD and the scratch disk for PS ans ACR on another SSD. I have tryed all imaginable settings, and no hope to use the ACR. Old ACR are OK, only this 6.4.1 have a big problem on my system.

ACR sharpening range vs. PS4 sharpening range

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for