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

Similar Messages

What is the photo sharpening method used in Preview?

When looking at an image in Preview, under Tools -> Adjust Color, there is an option for sharpening. Does anybody know what sharpening method/ algorithm is used, and is it based on one of the several sharpening methods used in, e.g. Photoshop?
Thanks,
Richard

Hi,
It supports up to 16Gb as mentioned on page #4 of the third manual of the follong link
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/manualCategory?cc=us&lc=en&product=5344330
Regards.
BH
**Click the KUDOS thumb up on the left to say 'Thanks'**
Make it easier for other people to find solutions by marking a Reply 'Accept as Solution' if it solves your problem.

Which is your favorite sharpen skill for image to print and to upload via web

Hi
which is your favorite sharpen skill for photo ?
which skill do you use for a print or upload via web like flirck ,one exposure
i like a lot this skill http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tutorials/sharpen-an-image/photo-sharpening.html
i know what would you think ... every image has a sharpen skill
but i would like to know your favorite or more used for print or web upload
thanks
cheers

Personally I'm fond of working at an upsampled resolution then sharpening near the end of my workflow, then downsampling for use as a work product.
Example: Work at double (or more) the pixel count you'll need for web publishing, sharpen fairly aggressively, then downsample. That tends to get you highly detailed looking results that are cleaner of sharpening artifacts.
As far as just sharpening things, I invented my own set of actions that employ fractals...
-Noel

Favorite backup methods?

Has anyone used Backup 3 here on the the Apple site?
Any other software that you like, especially for graphics files?
Better to use an external hard drive? Or online storage?
Thanks for any suggestions and input!
iMac G5 Mac OS X (10.3.9)

If you want to spend the best $20 you ever have, get this:
SuperDuper!
This will work perfectly with an external firewire drive, and will provide simple, and reliable backups down the road...
LaCie and Micronet as well as Other World Computing all sell good FW drives - that's what I recommend and use myself.
Scott

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.

Is it possible to make a Streamwork method as an iframe?

Two related questions
The developer documentation talks about Methods. But could someone explain how these relate to the Tools Catalog within Streamwork. If one makes a new method, can it create something which gets added to the Tools Catalog or which is available within Streamwork under the Add menu?
And if so, is it possible to create an app which calls an external app on a server within an iframe? So that you could insert another app in an iframe within Streamwork, but integrate it to Streamwork?
Sorry if these are answered elsewhere or not sensible questions, but hope answers might help others too.
Edited by: John Kleeman on Dec 3, 2010 6:45 PM

When you add a Method it is available in the Tools catalog (once it is approved, of course).
When a user "favorites" the method (by clicking on the star) it will show up in the add menu for that user.
The beauty of following the OpenSocial pattern is that the code in the Method can be running on your own server. So you don't need to write a method to call back to your server -- you can just develop the functionality you want (in any language, of course) and when the user adds the method it is running your code on your server.
Does that help?

Sharpening in CS3

To sharpen a colour image you can,in CS2, go to Mode-Lab-Chanels etc and after sharpening return to Greyscale and RGB returning the image to colour this is a heavier sharpening method than using unsharp mask on the original image.
CS3 allows you to use the same method as far as returning to Greyscale but won't allow you to return to RGB and returning the colour to the image...
Any reason why.....
I use Windows XP CS3

It works fine at 100% view. But as a thumb rule I view the image at 12.5% or 25% or 50% depending on the image size/dimension and the resolution (250 or 300dpi) to view the sharpening effect. And this has always worked for me to check the amount of sharpening I need to provide to get good prints.
But viewing the image at 100% may not be the best way to see the sharpening effect on the final print. What surprises me is the fact that it works fine after I reset the settings to factory default for a few images.
I believe there are other folks out there who have seen similar issues but have no answers at this point of time.
Rgds,
Sudhir

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.

Demosaicing intro'd w/ LR3.2 Sharpening with 7D. Help requested.

All,
I hate pixel peeping, but none the less it appears that there is demosaicing being introduced in the new sharpening methods that I am not seeing in Canon DPP or for that matter CS3 USM, or Smart Sharpen. Images follow, and I can supply the original RAW file if required. If I am doing this comparison incorrectly, I'm open to any comments and corrections. All images are 100% center crop of a 7D image. No adjustments to exposure, clarity, etc. ISO 200 image, Canon 7D, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS
Image One: No image sharpening applied out of LR - Note the area of the two thin white sleeve stripes on player's left arm below patch - Smooth going around front toward back
Image Two: Above image but overcooked with USM - Same are still smooth
Image Three: Original RAW file processed with Canon DPP and Sharpening pushed to almost max. - Still Smooth
Image Four: RAW image processed in LR with Amt 40, Radius 0.8, Detail 25, Masking 20 - Note the demosaicing (stairsteppng) in that area. Also appears in the folds about the patch
Image Five: The above JPEG brought into CS3 with minimum Smart Sharpening applied - worsens condition (as expected)
Image Six: Image #4 brought into CS3 and minimal USM applied - worsens condition (as expected)
As I'm adding the images, I'm not sure the difference between the first three images and the last three are as stark as they are on my 24" Dell Ultrasharp, but I assure you they are there. I've tried lower amounts of sharpening out of LR, but the demosaicing is still created.
Any thoughts, different ways to approach, etc., are appreciated.
Jay S.

JayS In CT wrote:
Keith,
Got it.. so after repost, come prepared with a bullet proof vest. :-)
Jay S.
Keith_Reeder wrote:
JayS In CT wrote:
Dorin,
Could possibly be. I'm going to have to go back and figure out why I can't quite get it represented here and repost.
The usual trick is a 200% zoom - or more - crop, followed by a thorough lambasting for extreme, "what does that have to do with the Real World?" pixel-peeping!
Keith, Dorin, (and all),
Hopefully this shows what I was trying to illustrate. 200% on three images that are 100% crop of original. I did a screen grab of my 24" 1920x1200 Dell Ultrasharp. The lower right is converted JPEG from original RAW file in LR with no sharpening at all. Top right is DPP pushed all the way to the right on sharpening, upper left is LR sharpening with the setting listed above the image. Look at the area on the Jeter's left arm with the two white stripes under the patch, and the folds in the sleeve above the patch.
The point I was trying to make is that LR sharpening is introducing the stair step pattern you see. It isn't there with DPP (or very minimal) nor with the JPEG image not sharpened coming out of LR.
Jay S.

Nikon D200 sharpening

What is your favorite sharpen settings for Nikon D200 NEF files? If I used default settings, the pictures looks little bit soft for me.
Thanks.
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Ahoj Radke,
If you are shooting RAW then you can ignore the image optimizations, sharpness, saturation, contrast, and WHITE BALANCE at the time of shooting. They have no effect on RAW files--you determine all those parameters when you develop the RAW. That's one of the best things about a RAW file--you can't mess it up (except exposre and focus) at the time of shooting.
That said, there are two places that you might be sharpening your image. The RAW Fine Tuning and the Sharpening control panel. Right now I would sugest make an album of about 6 images that have a variety of detail from fine detail to coarse detail. In the Real World Photoshop books this is called high-frequency or low-frequency images. Set the sharpining in the RAW Fine Tuning to a place that looks OK for all the images.
If you over sharpen here the fine detail will be wiped out, if you under sharpen the coarse detail will look soft. Save this as a new camera default setting. This will be applied to all images you import from a D200 camera.
The Sharpening adjustment panel (control + S) is where you can boost the sharpening on an image by image basis. Since the coarse-detail/low-frequency images probably look pretty good with just the sharpening from RAW Fine Tuning then this will probably be used mostly for fine-detail/high-frequency images to boost the sharpening a bit more.
This is how I am running my setup now for my D200 and D2x. Aperture is still so new that I may change this a bit as I learn better how the different tools interact.
Thomas

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.

LR 1.1 Sharpening

This is just a note that, after learning about Version 1.1's improved sharpening, I've tried it and I'm impressed! As has been previously noted, it's "capture" sharpening and not so good for fine-tuned output when a document needs to be resized/resampled, but I do a lot of quick processing for getting images on the web and when I set Sharpening to full strength (150) and pretty high detail (I think about 70) it really made things snap!
I exported an image as a full-sized JPEG and the one thing I noticed is that the sharpened file was almost twice the sized of an unsharpened full-size JPEG, which was a bit odd, but I also exported a JPEG at a quality level of 80 and see very pleasing results -- perfectly adequate for web viewing, IMHO. Now, if we could get a sharpen method to apply to the LR resizing/resampling output, that would make the day!
Tony

>I exported an image as a full-sized JPEG and the one thing I noticed is that the sharpened file was almost twice the sized of an unsharpened full-size JPEG, which was a bit odd
Not really. When you sharpen you impact the jpg compression algorithm, which perceives there is more detail.

Changing size of image in Aperture

I just purchased a Nikon D2hs which has only a 4mp sensor. The image is pretty small relatively. I want to print at 13x19" on my Epson 2200 printer. In PS which is what I am used to, I upsized the image to 13x19" and resolution to 300 dpi and then after everything else, I would apply sharpening on a layer to preserve the original. In Aperture, it seems there is now way to raise the resolution and image size before applying sharpening. I think what happens is that you apply sharpening to the original 4mp image and request Aperture to print at the desired size. Aperture then upsizes the image at a dpi it determines is adequate and sends that to the printer with the sharpening applied before upsizing. Also does Aperture use the same bicubic sharper method of upsizing images that PS uses?
Is this correct. If I understand, in version 1.1, will we be able to use the workflow normally used in PS as I described above.
Also, speaking of sharpening, if anyone knows, will aperture version 1.1 have sharpening tools similar to smart sharpen or the PS version of USM?
I have not seen a specific description of what specifically is changed in Aperture 1.1. Is there a website that shows the tools added and changed and how they changed or for the new ones what they will look like and how they work?
A lost of questions I know. I am anxious to actually see 1.1 in operation as I know many of you are. Thanks for any help here.

I just purchased a Nikon D2hs which has only a 4mp
sensor. The image is pretty small relatively. I
want to print at 13x19" on my Epson 2200 printer. In
PS which is what I am used to, I upsized the image to
13x19" and resolution to 300 dpi and then after
everything else, I would apply sharpening on a layer
to preserve the original. In Aperture, it seems
there is now way to raise the resolution and image
size before applying sharpening. I think what
happens is that you apply sharpening to the original
4mp image and request Aperture to print at the
desired size. Aperture then upsizes the image at a
dpi it determines is adequate and sends that to the
printer with the sharpening applied before upsizing.
Also does Aperture use the same bicubic sharper
method of upsizing images that PS uses?
It's hard to say what method of upsizing Aperture uses. If you wanted to stay with that workflow, you'd probably be better off editing your image externall (in Photoshop), then resampling and applying the sharpening you need. When you save at the larger size Aperture will pick up that change.
Also, speaking of sharpening, if anyone knows, will
aperture version 1.1 have sharpening tools similar to
smart sharpen or the PS version of USM?
I am pretty sure not, though no-one has really done a good look at exactly how Aperture fares in comparison to other sharpening methods.
I have not seen a specific description of what
specifically is changed in Aperture 1.1. Is there a
website that shows the tools added and changed and
how they changed or for the new ones what they will
look like and how they work?
There are two places I know of.
Aperture's official 1.1 page:
http://www.apple.com/aperture/update.html
and my own Inside Aperture page with a little more detail on minor things they do not talk about on the update page:
http://insideaperture.com/Site/Aperture%20PMA%20New%201.1%20Features.html
Basically I would categorize the 1.1 update as primarily addressing RAW conversion quality and flexibility. The only new adjustment tool would seem to be the RAW Fine Tune Tool, I do not think any of the other adjustment tools have been modified.
The other big things addressed are DPI settings around export (so you could properly resize) and also the color meter (not exactly a tool). My own favorite thing fixed is actually the loupe, which displays real pixels at any level of magnification.
There are probably a lot of other little bug fixes included, and possible some feature tweaks as well. But I don't think you'll see anything major that's not on the list for this update.

Want to install Windows on my MacBook...am I out of luck?

Hi guys,
So I have a Late 2008 Unibody 13" MacBook ("MacBook 5,1") which I recently upgraded by installing Mavericks (previously had Snow Leopard.)
I want to install Windows on a partition via Boot Camp. Previously, I had Windows XP installed, but I had deleted the Boot Camp partition to free up space for my Mac HD prior to upgrading to Mavericks.
But now I see that the new version of Boot Camp that comes with Mavericks (Version 5.1.0) has dropped support for Windows XP.
Moreover, this page on Apple's support website tells me that Windows 7, 8 and 8.1 are not supported on my MacBook model: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5634
So, am I screwed? Is there no version of Windows that can work with my MacBook model (MacBook 5,1) and Boot Camp 5.1.0?
Please help!

UPDATE: I'm happy to report that Windows 7 64-bit does work perfectly with Boot Camp on my machine!
To help out anyone else who might need to install Windows 7 64-bit on their MacBook, I will outline what I did below. Please note that the following instructions worked for me on my system (MacBook 5,1 Late 2008 Aluminum Unibody 13", Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz, GeForce 9400M GPU, 8 GB RAM running OSX Mavericks and Boot Camp 5.10); I don't know if they will apply to any other MacBook models. Since my MacBook comes with an inbuilt DVD drive, I didn't need to create a bootable USB version of Windows; I simply used a (legitimate) Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit installation disc and product key.
1. Back up your important files on OSX using your favorite backup method.
2. Download the Boot Camp Support Software version 4.0.4033 here: http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1630. These are the drivers you need to install in Windows 7 to get your OS to recognize and use your hardware.
3. Unzip the zip file from the previous step and copy the contents (the folder named "BootCamp") to an empty USB stick that is FAT-formatted (to format the USB, you can use Disk Utility in OSX.)
4. Safely eject the USB once the folder has been copied onto it.
5. Insert your Windows 7 64-bit installation disc into your DVD drive.
6. Start Boot Camp Assistant.
7. Uncheck the box that tells you to download Windows support software (you have already done so; it's on your USB stick.)
8. Proceed with partitioning. Once finished, the computer will restart and Windows 7 installation should begin.
9. Hurdle 1: When the installation process for Windows 7 started up and the program asked me which partition I wanted to install Windows on, it wouldn't initially allow me to select the Boot Camp partition. I had to select that partition and click on "Format" first before it allowed me to install Windows onto it.
10. Windows 7 installation should proceed normally.
11. Once you have loaded into you Desktop, it is time to install the support software (i.e. drivers) from your USB. Insert the USB and copy the BootCamp folder onto your desktop. If you don't have an external mouse, pressing Shift-F10 will do the the same thing as right-clicking.
12. Hurdle 2: After copying the zip file containing the Boot Camp drivers to the desktop, I tried installing them via the setup file but got the error message "Boot Camp x64 is unsupported on this computer model". This is a LIE! To fix this, I first disabled the User Account Control (Start>Control Panel>User Accounts>Change User Account Control Settings>set to "Never Notify.") Then I rebooted. After rebooting, I navigated to the zip file BootCamp>Drivers>Apple>BootCamp.msi and it installed all the Boot Camp drivers perfectly. I rebooted again as per the installation process requirements.
13. Run Windows Update to get all of Microsoft's updates, including Service Pack 1 (took me hours...)
14. Hurdle 3: After updating my NVIDIA GPU (GeForce 9400M) driver to the most recent driver version (334.89 WHQL) via their automatic update program, I lost the ability to control my screen brightness (pressing the brightness keys brought up the brightness level indicator, but did not affect the actual screen brightness.) To fix this, I had to do the following:
14a. Go to Control Panel>Hardware and Sound>Device Manager>Monitor>Right-click Generic PnP Display and DISABLE it.
14b. Open regedit by typing "regedit" in the Start menu search bar.
14c. Navigate to the following sub key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/SYSTEM/CurrentControlSet/Control/Class/Video/0000
14d. Create a new DWORD named "EnableBrightnessControl" and set its value to be 1.
14e. Reboot.
After having done all this, Windows 7 with Service Pack 1 64-bit works flawlessly on my MacBook. I'm also happy to say that Guild Wars 2 runs quite well on low settings, which was the whole point of going through this.
I hope this thread is useful to others.

Issues and suggestions

There are some features missing from EOS 60D while the one worked ia my old 450D.
The first one is for all Canon cameras, the other really a downgrade from my EOS 450D.
a) Set Shooting style to M, set ISO to Auto ISO, set aperture to e.g. f8 and Shutter speed to e.g. 1/200. THERE'S NO WAY to over/under expose (setting EV to - or +), only bracketing is possible. Nikon cameras can do this! Can this be done via a firmware upgrade?
b) There's an LCD diplay on top of the camera that lights on when pressing the light button next to it. When taking long exposures in Bulb mode you can't make out what the LCD panel says unless you light it with other means (if you don't want to move the camera at all). In EOS 450D the meter was showing in the rear screen. Can this also be done for 60D?
Now picture these as requested features:
c) Set a minimum shutter speed (e.g. 1/60 sec), fixed or Auto ISO selectable, fixed aperture e.g. f8 (like in AV mode) or automatic selectable. Numbers should blink if correct exposure cannot be achieved with the settings. Shutter speed can be variable from e.g. 1/60 and faster. This is more useful than another custom mode.
d) In addition: set a maximum aperture number (actually a narrower aperture) e.g. f11, fixed or Auto ISO selectable, fixed shutter speed or automatic selectable. Numbers should blink if correct exposure cannot be achieved with the settings. Aperture value can be variable from e.g. f11 and lower.
e) If you can do the above easily, then can you try and let the user set an upper and lower value for Aperture Value and Shutter speed in which the user can operate the camera (used for best quality images).
These features are very useful when shooting quality images and you know lens and light limits.
f) Digital Photo Professional should be updated with better sharpening algorithms. This is really a joke!! Even Nikon has a top RAW decoder for thei cameras! Come one, you are losing customers over such issues!!

i couldn't agree more with the above
as a programmer i can say that all those settings mentioned can be easily create in a firmware upgrade.
Nikon cameras offer a ton of features like the above
Magic Latern hack also offers many things
why canon policies are limited to such features? is it really difficult to create a proper bulb indicator or a minimum speed setting?
the digital photo professional is really weak. The sharpening methods and the exposure/highlight/shadows settings are far behind the competition such as lightroom.
I don't understand why...
I gotta admit, if i were a new customer i wouldn't choose canon. Nikon offers much more features in software both cameras and computer editing software even if it costs more.. Canon doesn't seem to provide something similar and makes cameras less attractive to new photographers.

Favorite Sharpening Methods?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for