Photokit Sharpener and Lightroom

Does anyone here use PK Sharpener, and if so do you skip the (PKS) initial Capture Sharpening and instead use the sharpening in Lightroom?
Advantages to which?
TIA,
Geoff

You really only need PKS if you need to go into Photoshop for creative sharpening. The capture sharpening in LR is => than PKS and the output sharpening in LR is = to PKS output sharpening. Personally, I really don't use LR's adjustment brush with local sharpening (it's really not "there" yet) so for local sharpening I go into Photoshop and use PKS.

Similar Messages

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.

Capture vs. Content Sharpening in Lightroom and ACR

Hi,
I have a question regarding sharpening in Lightroom and ACR. In the information I have read, many authors point out that Lightroom and ACR's detail panel is optimized to provide control over capture sharpening. In a post that I read recently by Jeff Schewe, he clarified that and said that we are really sharpening for both capture and content with the detail panel in Lightroom.
That is confusing to me because after reading Bruce Fraser's book on sharpening, capture and content sharpening were treated as two different processes. If I understood correctly capture sharpening for digital captures was based on the characteristics of the camera and the file size of the image, with larger megapixel files receiving a smaller radius. In addition, I read that the radius in content sharpening is dictated by the dominant characteristics of the subject matter being sharpened, with high frequency subject matter receiving a smaller radius and low frequency receiving a higher radius.
The reason I am confused is that it appears that capture and content sharpening for the same digital capture can at times be quite different. For example, I believe that the book suggests a radius for an 11 megapixel capture of .4. If the image content calls for a sharpening radius of 1.3, what do I do? In Lightroom/ACR I can only choose 1 radius.
In all the reading I have done regarding the proper use of Lightroom and ACR, it suggest that you should use a radius that is suited to the image content. So it appears that we are that we are being encouraged to perform content sharpening only with Lightroom and ACR. What happened to the "capture" sharpening portion of the process?
Since Lightroom and ACR are capable of recognizing the camera make and model as well as the file size, are they applying capture sharpening behind the scenes that is tailored to that specific camera and file. If not, then how are we achieving both capture and content sharpening in the same operation?
Sharpening for both capture and content in one pass would seem to conflict with some of the basic concepts elaborated on in Bruce Fraser's book. I am assuming that since Lightroom is using Photokit Sharpener routines, that they have accounted for the capture portion of the sharpening, but I don't see that stated explicitly anywhere in anything that I have read. If they have, I say kudos to everyone involved as that would be great. I'm just looking for a clearer understanding of what's happening.
If anyone can shed some light on this topic I would be very appreciative.
Thanks,
John Arnold

>Since Lightroom and ACR are capable of recognizing the camera make and model as well as the file size, are they applying capture sharpening behind the scenes that is tailored to that specific camera and file. If not, then how are we achieving both capture and content sharpening in the same operation?
The answer is that the detail section crosses over into creative territory and is not strictly "capture sharpening," although that is what is mostly meant to do.
Following the ultimate logic of the "sharpening workflow" might make you conclude that Capture sharpening and output sharpening are purely scientific steps where you should not make ANY creative decision at all and that creative decisions are only to be made in the creative sharpening step. In the real world, there are creative decisions and decisions determined by the content matter that enter into the capture step too just like in the output step. You might like extra-crunchy prints for example, but somebody else might prefer softer prints making you approach the output sharpening with a creative intent. The sharpening workflow was probably (Jeff will know more about the history) more of an attempt to arrive at a more rational way of approaching the process and to provide a guideline. It is probably not meant to rigidly separate the workflow up in defined steps where in the 1st step you're not allowed to think or look at the image, in the second step you can go completely wild, and in the last step you have to close your eyes again. The goal was probably to make the photographer realize that the different steps have a different purpose. Not to make you turn off your creative genius or to treat the process like a black box.
My approach to this, inspired in some part by Jeff's many posts on this, is to make the image look good at 1:1 using the detail tool in Lightroom/ACR. This is inherently driven by content of course as you use visual feedback. If your image is large swaths of plain color separated by sharp transitions with little structure, you probably do not want a high setting on the detail slider as you might induce halos and you probably want to use some masking. Conversely, if you shoot brick architecture, a high detail value might look good. If you shot at high ISO, you might need a different approach again to not blow up noise. Also, portraits might need a different approach. After the 1:1 optimization, I sometimes selectively sharpen (or blur!) parts of the image (rare but can be effective - example would be people's eyes). Then for the output step I use appropriate output sharpening for the medium according to my taste. You see that this is not rigidly following the workflow, but still is in the spirit.

Sharpening in Lightroom and/or Photoshop

It appears to me that I can obtain all necessary sharpening, including improved midtone contrast (normally obtained with the High Pass Filter in Photoshop) using the tools available in Lightroom 2.4.
I am considering the following Lightroom only workflow: 1. Capture sharpen using Sharpening and Clarity. 2. Local sharpening using the Adjustment Brush. 3. Output sharpening using the appropriate module for the output.
Given this workflow, are there any reasons to use Photoshop for sharpening? What can Photoshop do that Lightroom cannot do when sharpening photographic images?
Thank you.

Procedure is to apply global sharpening optimised for high frequency then send this image to Photoshop as a Smart Object. In Photoshop you create another smart object using the first as the master (i.e. Layer>Smart Objects>New Smart Object via Copy). This Smart Object will have the same sharpening parameters as the master (i.e. the one created by Lightroom). Double click the smart object to open in Camera Raw. Adjust sharpening parameters for low frequency areas then close Camera Raw (Click OK). The new smart object will be obscuring the underlying high frequency smart object. Next we create a Layer Mask (first select low frequency layer) by holding down Alt/Option key then click on Layer Mask button at bottom of Layers panel. Select your brush, adjust to size, adjust opacity to around 30 to 50% (lower is probably better) and begin to brush away mask to expose underlying high frequency smart object.
EricBier wrote:
I do not understand why using the LR adjustment brush to brush in sharpening is different from brushing in sharpening on a layer mask in PS.
Adjustment Brush uses the parameters as the Detail panel, so you're going to have a hard time getting values that are appropriate for both high and low frequency sharpening. If Eric drops by he may provide more info on the Detail panel link to Adjustment Brush.

Sharpening in PS3 and lightroom

Hi,
After sharpening in PS3 with the intent of printing from Lightroom, what should the settings be regarding the sharpening in Lightroom? Still on high? How does the Lightroom sharpening affect the sharpening done in PS3, if in fact something is happening? Thanks again!

John,
Good question. You may already be very aware of the following, but for those who may not be, the sharpening tools in Lr are MEANT to be used as the first stage in a two or three step process, as outlined by Bruce Fraser in his book, RealWorld Camera Sharpening with Adobe CS2. Jeff Schewe, a close friend and collaborator with the late Mr. Fraser, has explained the whole thing both online in Lr tutorials and here on the forum.
Bruce taught three stage sharpening:
1) Capture, where you overcome the problems inherent in digital sensors and Bayer algorithms (this is what LR's sharpening is designed to do and does quite well);
2) Creative, where you select specific areas to do sharpening with the settings appropriate for that area, including "de"-sharpening some areas if useful (done in Photoshop or your other full-pixel-editing program of choice);
3) Output, sharpening designed to match the image to the specific output use, whether "online" or printed, and dependent if printed upon the specific size of the image to be output on the specific printing device. This last stage, also probably done with your chosen pixel editor, is done only for that specific print and you might choose not to save this as your "final" of that image.
As you can see, the problem with printing from Lr is that it is not really designed to do the output sharpening ... but still, once you understand the tools it does fairly well, for smaller prints at least. I think you'll have to test what it does to an image already sharpened in CS3, and let us know what it does.
I think, as Nicolas suggested, that if the Lr staff includes a printing module and expects us to actually use it, they might include a separate tutorial on this specific useage of the sharpening tools.
For anyone who hasn't seen it, PLEASE go online and find Jeff's tutorial on the sharpening features of Lr and how to use them.
R. Neil Haugen

Sharpening and noise defaults in the Develop Module

Capture Sharpness
I’m getting my head around sharpening and am of the understanding that there are three distinct phases: Capture Sharpening, Creative Sharpening and Output sharpening
With regards to Capture Sharpening I’ve noticed that when I import a CR2 file into Lightroom 3.6 there is an Adobe pre-set in the Develop Module. Is this a form of Capture Sharpening default?
Sharpening
Amount: 25
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 25
Noise Reduction
Luminance: 0
Colour: 25
Detail: 50

In Lr, "capture" sharpening is global sharpening, and "creative" sharpening is local sharpening (or sharpen masking on global basis but tailored to the image), or at least that's one way of looking at it.
in other words, if you're sharpening raw data non-destructively, such that first round of sharpening isn't being baked in, there is no need to separate capture sharpening from creative sharpening, in your mind, or in the software you use.
Put another way, the notion of capture sharpening comes from days when first round of sharpening was baked in, e.g. shooting jpegs, or in raw workflows where first pass yields a baseline tiff, and 2nd pass is artist's choice...
That said, what's needed for artistic sharpening (creative effects) can differ from what's need for baseline sharpening (initial "capture" sharpening, if you will).
Capture sharpening: just make stuff look reasonably sharp, since without it things don't.
Creative sharpening: sky's the limit... - some people consider Clarity to be a form of creative sharpening...
Note: since Lr's sharpening settings can't be varied (there is no way to apply high-radius sharpening in one region, and low-radius sharpening in another), and since its algorithm is aimed primarily at countering inherent and/or subtle/limited unsharpness, some people consider Lr's sharpening to be "capture-only". On the other hand, capture sharpening is, almost by definition, global, so since Lr supports local sharpening, and sharpen masking, those aspects can be considered "creative".
In my opinon, it's best not to get too hung up on semantics/terminology, but in a nutshell, conceptually:
* Capture sharpening needs to be done so stuff looks reasonably sharp, and is often done across the board, not dependent on image content (this is why most people apply a default amount of sharpening in Lightroom).
* Creative sharpening is going beyond initial/default sharpening, generally on an image-by-image basis, although not necessarily. Note: it may involve removing all global "capture" sharpening in favor of no sharpening, or local sharpening only (raw data required).
* Output sharpening depends on resolution and medium etc, and therefore needs to be done last - tailored to output device and such..
Sorry if this post had too high of an answer to question ratio .
Rob

Noise, Sharpening and ACR

I have recently switched from processing my raw files from Aperture to Adobe Camera Raw 4.4.1. I shoot landscapes with the Canon 1Ds Mark III, low ISO, and wish to make very large prints (30-50"). After reading "Real World Camera Raw with CS3" it seems like the authors say that capture sharpening can be accomplished in ACR instead of what I was doing right after Aperture (with sharpening off)- that is, using Ninja Noise and then capture sharpen with Photokit Sharpener. But if I now capture sharpen in ACR I won't be able to use Ninja Noise since one should not sharpen noise. Right? So does this mean that if I capture sharpen in ACR that I should also use ACR's Noise Reduction? Or should I turn off ACR's Sharpening and Noise Reduction and do as I did before - use Ninja and PhotoKit sharpening after raw processing? (I hope this makes sense - I'm still learning the basics). Also any rough settings for what I'm doing would be very helpful. Thanks in advance.

>Not at all. There's ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with that workflow. I would recommend it myself.
>[EDIT] except I prefer Noise Ninja most of the time, and Noiseware in a few cases.
I've discussed this matter with Gordon on another thread, but a few points are worth repeating here. On page 157 of his Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop PSCS2, Bruce Fraser states, "Always do noise reduction before sharpening. If you sharpen, you'll almost certainly make the noise worse; the noise reduction tool will have to work harder, and will probably wipe out the sharpening you did anyway."
Most noise reduction tools do not eliminate noise but merely make it less visible. When you sharpen after noise reduction, some or much of the noise may reappear. If you do the sharpening first, this problem is eliminated, but the effect of your sharpening may also be wiped out.
Sharpening and noise reduction are basically inverse processes and work against another. Some of these problems may be eased with the use of masks. You can use a surface mask during noise reduction to help confine the NR to smooth areas where the noise is most noticeable and keep the NR away from the edges where sharpness would suffer. Similarly, you can use an edge mask during sharpening to help confine the sharpening to the edges.
That said, Noise Ninja can work reasonably well on JPEG images that have been sharpened in camera as they often are. In this case, one has to use a different noise profile for the best results.
Bill

RAW Image Sharpening in Lightroom

Hi,
I have been shooting in Camera RAW for some time but just learned that the sharpening in the develop module is for RAW Image Sharpening and not for output sharpening. My problem is I have lots of images that I have already processed with lightrooms develop module.
To get the best images, do I need to go back and reset the develop module settings on an image, apply the RAW sharpening, then re-apply the develop module settings? Or is lightroom smart enough to allow me to apply the RAW sharpening after I have "developed" the photo and still get the same results?
Thanks in advance to anyone that knows the answer to this one!
Steve Wetzel
http://wetzelphoto.wordpress.com

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Skippie2u<[email protected]> said:
>
>
>> If so, then I'd say you should apply the
>> sharpening. Unless you've further modified the file (using Photoshop
>> or whatever), then adding the sharpness in the Develop module should
>> just happen, as another development step.
>
Your right, it should, but that does not mean it does. What I am asking is will to get the best results, should I apply the RAW image sharpening FIRST. Will that give better results then applying it later or last.
>
>
>
>> If you were happy with the way they looked before learning about the
>> sharpening, then I'd say just continue to enjoy your work.
So you believe the RAW Image sharpening is optional?
I was trying to point out that if you were happy with the image
before, you could just leave them as they are. If you feel that
applying the sharpening makes the image better, then using it would be
a help. And since you say:
>I created a virtual copy, reset the settings on it, applied RAW Image Sharpening, then applied my development settings. The image looked way better doing that then applying no RAW Image sharpening
then I'd say you probably want to apply the sharpening, since it
sounds like you would be happier with this much better image.
My point was that some people learn a fact, or a different method, and
automatically decrease their happiness and satisfaction with their
prior efforts. In your case, sounds like you've tested the new method,
and like the results better. To me, that would indicate that I should
start using this new method in future. Depending on how much you like
the improvement will determine whether you spend the time and go back
and re-process your (already completed) images.

Base Sharpening and Noise Reduction D800/E

Has anyone set up a base sharpening and noise reduction at different ISOs for the D800/E?
I had LR all set up for my D300 and D700 so the base settings where used at import.
Now I need to do it with the D800E and was wondering what others might be using.
Thanks
Jim

Order doesn't matter in Lightroom.

Question re Order of Sharpening and NR

Hello all,
Very quick question regarding order of sharpening and noise reduction. Is NR only supposed to be used to deal with sensor noise (like high ISO noise)? I ask because sharpening obviously introduces noise, which then could be tamed with NR (decreasing sharpness though, right?), but do you really want to do that? Are you supposed to do NR first, then sharpen up and live with the noise introduced therein?
Thanks, and I apologize for the stupid question!
Almost forgot--I do NOT have LR storing metadata in XMP files automatically (the checkbox in the catalog settings), but I noticed that after editing and adding metadata to photos, LR creates XMPs anyway. This confused me, but I checked the folder a little while later and noticed that all the XMPs are gone. Does LR temporarily create the XMPs before its stores in info in the catalog?
Thanks!
f1fan

The order in which you do things in Lightroom is meaningless...Lightroom processes images in its own order which has nothing to do with the order you set parameters.
And yes, Noise Reduction and Sharpening are really interrelated. It could be argued you shouldn't do one without doing the other. Noise Reduction is off by default but even well exposed low ISO images may need noise reduction to optimize the image when proper sharpening is applied.

Leica Monochrom and Lightroom export problems

I am using the latest version of LR on a 2011 Mac Book Pro. I am running into problems when I export Leica Monochrom DNG files that are shot AT AND ABOVE ISO 6400. Lightroom is brightening the files on export a lot so that the final exported file does not look anything like what my edit looked like. This only happens with full resolution exports. Other Leica MM users have experienced the same issue. I have photos and screen shots to prove this. What is the problem?

What I was hoping for was an original raw image with all the OP’s adjustments intact so I could demonstrate what was happening at various zoom levels and with different settings, but that seems overly difficult to come by so I’ll give my analysis of what is happening and what to do about it:
The brightening has to do with the micro-noise-grain that has been excessively sharpened making the image a mixture of mostly white and mostly black dots immediately adjacent to each other rather than continuous tone of a low-ISO image. This is not an error with LR or with the camera, and will happen with any such image from any camera. The “brightening” is merely the visibility of the white granules at 1:1 zoom. When a zoom level less than 100% is used, LR or Windows Photo Viewer or Mac Preview must determine how to combine multiple pixels together to represent one output pixel in the reduced-sized image. Different viewers use different methods to combine adjacent pixels into one. Some use Average, some use Median, some use the value of a single pixel position to represent the entire reduced-size combination pixel—this is called nearest neighbor and is the fastest but least accurate. LR is known to use a fast but inaccurate resampling algorithm which is why there is a warning on the Detail panel to use 1:1 zoom to judge sharpening and noise adjustments.
The problem here is that this lightening and darkening depending on zoom level is messing with toning adjustments, so how to tone and adjust such images, is to temporarily turn off Detail sharpening and turn up noise-reduction then adjust toning in Fit view. Then zoom in to 1:1 and adjust the noise-reduction up or down to remove most of the obvious grain, and turn up sharpen masking so all you’re sharpening is edges. Maybe even turn off the Detail slider (set to zero) to keep from enhancing micro-noise texture.
If you do want grain for artistic effect then do that after you’ve removed the ISO noise. The difference with high-ISO noise and added noise-grain is the high-ISO noise is single-pixel in size and will not be resampled accurately while the noise-granules created by the Effects panel can be control both in size and intensity so as not to respond negatively to resampling nearly as much.
If you are exporting images to nearly full resolution then dial back the export sharpening quite a bit. If you are resizing quite a bit smaller than any micro texture will have been averaged out by the resizing and adding more sharpening during Export sharpening will help things look crisp, again.

Hi does anybody know how to perform roundtripping between aperture 3 and lightroom 3? i can set up aperture to send the file to lightroom BUT i cannot get lightroom to send it back with the just the adjustment (it sends the image as a separate file)

basically, i find the sharpening tool in aperture extreamly slow and would like to use lightroom, just for sharpening. I then would like to send the image back to aperture as just an adjustment on the original file and not a whole new replica file as the original. can any body give a easy solution? cheers

What you want to do can't be done. There is no low-friction way to combine image adjustments from Aperture and Lightroom. There is no way at all to combine them without creating new files.
This was recently discussed in this thread.
Are you using the Edge Sharpening adjustment? In Aperture 3, it superceded the old Sharpening adjustment, which remains included for backwards compatibility.

PhotoKit Sharpener over-ruling ACR ?

Ever since we started using the latest version of PhotoKit Sharpener (1.2.5) we have started having problems with Adobe Camera Raw (4.1). This problem is happening on 3 machines, both Intel and Non-Intel G5 Macs, OSX 10.4.9
Whenever we use the PhotoKit Sharpener after importing an image from ACR and save an image, the NEXT CR2 that we try to open will NOT open in ACR, but instead bypasses ACR and opens directly in Photoshop.
You CAN open the next file in ACR if you do it though -------> File > Open -------> But WHAT a pain to always have to navigate and scroll down, when double-clicking to open is SO much faster.
In order to get the CR2 to open in ACR (with double-clicking) , we must restart Photoshop. Nutz!
ANY help greatly appreciated!
Thanks!
Sara

Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the response!
We tried this but can only get it to work when opening from Bridge. Since we don't typically use Bridge as part of our workflow (for color-correcting), is there any other way to get ACR to return to it's normal behavior (as in, double-clicking on a RAW image opens it in ACR only, not Photoshop) ?
Thanks again!
Sara

Nikon D200 Settings and Lightroom

I have a Nikon D200 and right now I have my camera settings as 2+ for sharpening and 1+ for tone compensation. Is it better to leave sharpening as 'None' and tone compensation as 'Less Contrast or Normal' and do those adjustments in Lightroom? The nice thing about having these settings currently is that I have less processing of my RAW images in Lightroom (since the sharpening and tone compensation are already pretty much set).
Any suggestions or ideas? Thank You.

>... since the sharpening and tone compensation are already pretty much set.
If you like the results you're getting from your in-camera settings and don't want to process your own images -- stick to JPEG. Only Nikon Capture and Picture Project can read the D200 camera settings the way you like them. To keep it that way, Nikon hides or encrypts your settings from other applications.
Other raw processors --like ACR or LR -- rely on you to customize the "developer" to process your raw files the way you like them. As a courtesy, LR baselines your raw images to a set of standards the development team felt gave you the best place to start. You need to do the rest.
Hope this level of detail helps you. Good luck ...

Using PSE 6 and Lightroom together

I have been a fan of PSE for years and have built up a catalog with over 20k items. I am working more and more in raw format and Lightroom seems to meet my requiremeents well, but, how to use PSE 6 and Lightroom together. what do people do? keep the catalogs in both applications? catalog in PSE and just edit and print in Lightroom? Are Lightroom changes then reflected back in Elements when viewing images?
thanks for help and suggestions, Olly

I'd have to disagree slightly with Barbara - for me LR is primarily a RAW processor with a so-so Organising capability. Of course that's only my opinion.
Having LR and Elements working together is possible but it's really a one way street. The ability to Import an Elements Catalog is a feature of LR but it doesn't work very well. Tagging hierarchies get lost and even Date/Time info can go astray.
For me I had to start re-importing all my collection manually into LR and re-keyword them. LR is quick at applying keywords - which can also be done during the import process itself.
What you can do from LR is to open an image in Elements Editor for any creative work. LR creates a TIF version to edit in Elements and then keeps the results in it's library when you close the image.
My workflow now is to import new shots directly into LR and Keyword and Process them but I also export TIF files which I then have Elements Organise - Elements will pick up LR keywords correctly.
I just find Elements Organiser is faster and importantly allows you to select specifc images by selecting multiple AND combinations of Tags. LR only uses an OR function. I.e images that have only London AND Bob as opposed to images that have London OR Bob.
Printing I still do from Photoshop as I find it more controllable - particularly Print Sharpening.
Colin

Photokit Sharpener and Lightroom

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for