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.

Similar Messages

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

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

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.

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!

Sharpening in ACR 7.1

I'm reading the part of Martin Evening's "Adobe Photoshop CS6 for Photographers" dealing with sharpening in ACR. As in his previous edition for CS5, he seems to be saying that putting the Detail slider at 100 is akin to USM in PS, while placing it at 0 minimizes halos. I would gather this means the 0 setting is deconvolution sharpening.
As I recall, Eric Chan indicated that the settings were the other way round: 0 was akin to USM and 100 deconvolution. Which is which?
thanks,
grampus45

grampus45 wrote:
This would suggest that a significant use of masking would be appropriate in applying capture sharpening. But many things I read, and many suggested 'presets,' tend to downplay or even ignore masking.
I would argue against the term "significant" and more likely call it a beneficial use of masking. You want to be sharpening edges and generally don't want to sharpen surfaces (which are broad areas of tone/color). The default for masking is zero because, well, Thomas decided that no masking should be applied at default but almost any image will benefit from having some edge masking used.
How much really depends on the edge frequency of the image…if you are shooting portraits you want a fairly high edge masking (40 or above). If you are shooting low ISO landscape images with a high frequency of image texture, you probably want less; 10-25 or so. But…that depends on the amount, radius, detail and noise reduction settings…you really can't give a range of settings for any single parameter because they all depend on each other...
grampus45 wrote:
We know from Bruce Fraser what the general principles of sharpening are. What we need now is someone like Bruce to write a treatise on how to enact those principles, such as they are possible, with the sharpening facility in ACR. We can attempt to infer what's happening by moving the sliders themselves, but it's really going to take someone with "inside knowledge" to do the job properly. So far we only have vague hand waving.
I did...when I revised Bruce's Real World Image Sharpening book...which came out just before the PV 2010 noise reduction functionality (unfortunately). The aim is to get the image to look good at 1:1. That is the intent and design of the Detail panel in ACR/LR. And yes, it's tough because there are tons of cameras and tons of image types to deal with...yes, it's tough to evaluate just enough sharpening but not too much. You can't accomplish that with a few presets...you need to educate your eyes...no way around that.
And the other 2 phases of image sharpening, creative and output sharpening are further complicating factors. The ACR/LR creative sharpening is primitive but useful. The output sharpening in LR is actually very, very good. It's less good in ACR because of the limitations of the size functionality in ACR. Output sharpening MUST be done at the final output size...and sizing in ACR other than native are problematic.
The bottom line is to make the image look good at 1:1. Don't try to do over/under sharpening in the Detail panel, don't try to sharpen for effect or do creative sharpening and don't worry at all about output sharpening. If you are shooting low ISO on high rez cameras, you can sharpen more aggressively, the smaller the capture size and higher the ISO the more you need to be careful of setting the sharpening and noise reduction correctly.
The only generalizations I can make os that you do want to adjust all of the following; Amount, Radius, Detail, Edge Masking and Luminance Noise Reduction to get an optimal capture sharpening result. The numbers will vary by camera size, lens type, Exposure, ISO and shooting techniques. YMWV...

PhotoKit Sharpener 2.0 just released-System requirements?

As hard as I looked, I could not find on the PixelGenius site either the "What's New" or the "System Requirements" for the just released PhotoKit Sharpener 2.0. (The PDF User Guide won't download.)
• Has anything other than 64-bit functionality been added in terms of features or new algorithms?
• Is this new version Tiger/PPC compatible? (CS4)
Thanks in advance.
Wo Tai Lao Le
我太老了

Herb 19 wrote:
Found that my CS5 in 64 bit mode does not provide access to change dimensions in the output sharpener module of Contone and Inkjet. However in 32 bit mode this is ok. Here is a screendump of the plug-in running in the 64 bit CS5.
This is a feature, not a bug...as we said in the manual (I think it's in there) you need to have your units set to Inches or CMs (unit dimensions) NOT pixels in order to resize. In Contone and Inkjet, we allow resizing WITHOUT resampling because we feel it's important to maintain the native pixel dimensions of the image.
So, if you change the size (assuming a unit other than pixels) the resolution will change to maintain the original pixel count (same as doing a resize in Image Size with resample off).
For Halftone, we DO allow BOTH resizing AND resampling because when you prepare an image for halftone repro, you DON'T want to send TOO many pixels at the line screen. So we suggest resizing and downsampling to get you images in the 1.5-2.5 (max at 2.5) PPI to LPI ratio. We really do suggest 2X as the optimal.
For Web and Multimedia, we allow resampling but since the web and screen display is designed for 1 image pixel for 1 screen pixel (assuming "72 pixels" but in reality it's whatever the display really is).
We just realized today that we didn't explain the Halftone Output Sharpening correctly in the manual...sorry about that. We're actually planning on putting up some sample workflows on the web site and preparing images for halftone output will be one of them!

LR2: Is the new print sharpening feature made by Pixel Genius/PhotoKit Sharpener?

I have been hoping for Pixel Genius to make a plug in for its PhotoKit Sharpener which I use constantly and thus travel to Photoshop to use. Knowing some of the connections between several companies and hearing the description of the new sharpening algorithms for print sharpening, it seems plausible to me that LR's print sharpening may actually be PhotoKit output sharpeners.
Any ideas if this might be true?

Thanks Jeff for all the great work you do for our community of photographers!
To make it easier for readers of this thread, here are the settings that Jeff just referred to:
LR2 develop preset "sharpen-landscapes"
amount 40
radius 0.8
detail 50
masking 0
LR2 develop preset "sharpen-portraits"
amount 35
radius 1.2
detail 20
masking 70
Therefore as Jeff said, we would pick a radius of say, 1.0 to replicate PKS "dig hi res medium edge" capture sharpening. I am assuming that we would probably keep the detail at 50 with no masking with a general non portrait image. Portraits obviously benefit from the masking so that skin areas don't get sharpened.
As for answer #3 there still is a choice beyond paper type and that choice is "Low", "Standard" and "High" as well as choosing the paper type. I will assume that "standard" probably replicates PKS behavior th best for inkjet printing "reading between the lines" of Jeff's post above.
Thanks again for helping us understand how to compare PKS and LR2 sharpening.

Sharpening in ACR has stopped working

I always open files as smart objects. When I sharpen a photo in ACR and open in Photoshop the sharpening doesn't appear; if I reopen in ACR, the changes I have made to radius are there, but the stregnth is zero. I have tried this on numerous photos, and have reset preferences...still the problem exists. The sharpening function used to work. Now what? Thanks!
I'm using a Mac Pro, with the most current version of Photoshop CS4.

There is a setting in ACR that says Apply Sharpening to Preview Only and maybe that is enabled?

Easy capture sharpening in ACR 6

After reading most of the books available on ACR and sharpening, including Jeff's latest, and after having dinked with this stuff for many years, I've come to a startling conclusion, at least to me. Setting Amount = 150, Radius=1. Detail = 0, and Masking = 0 seems to work well for CAPTURE sharpening on all of my images. And I'm including low and high iso, "high frequency" and portrait, etc.
I capitalized capture because to me these settings work well on the initial image prep, narrowing the light/dark transitions without adding any discernable halo. Doing as is generally recommended, bringing up Detail to add a slight halo visible at 400% but not at 100%, with corresponding Amount and Radius adjustments, can certainly produce a slightly sharper appearing image on the monitor, but IMO one has now at least partially crossed over into output sharpening for the monitor.
Another advantage of the 150-1-0-0 approach is the lack of any artifacts as one continues to process the image, particularly upsampling for printing. For noisy images I do end up adjusting Masking as I interatively apply NR, but again in general the settings work well. And of course setting them up as ACR defaults simplifies processing. I'm curious as to whether others have arrived at a similar conclusion, or not. I haven't been doing this as a default very long, and wonder if I'll come across pitfalls later.
Richard Southworth

OK, well I just tried this on a landscape image that is basically almost all high/mid frequency:
Amount 150
Radius 0.5
Detail 0
Masking 0 (although I would mask appropriately with any image)
and then compared it to
Amount 35
Radius 0.5
Detail 100
Masking 0
Critical viewing was at 100, 200, 300 and 400% in ACR.
I am really surprised at this! Although the sharpening is extremely close to the same amount in appearance (at 100%) the first settings with detail at 0, to my eye has a lot cleaner edges (less halowing) and definitely less artifacting in smoother areas (even w no masking). Basically at the edges of the image there seems to be less feathering of pixels transitioning them (may interpolate up better this way?).
I will do some more testing, to see how the file then handles Sharpening for Output (with the new datail at 0 settings). I am thinking at this point that your detail at 0 idea might be sound. Less artifacting and cleaner edges seems to mean that the file will take more aggressive sharpening after up sizing it, and then the grain simulation I use to disguise the artifacting may be able to be a little less aggressive.
Question, do you still approach the masking (ACR) the same way?
Lastly, I tried using the first settings of sharpening on an image interpolated to max size in ACR (about 20MP) and then tried the same capture sharpening settings on an image at native size (about 12MP) then interpolated up to 20MP using PS Smoother (remembering that ACR applies the sharpening after the uprez). I have found the ACR uprez to have more detail at ultra zoom levels. But if ACR applies the capture sharpening after the ACR uprez (if my reading is right, Jeff S said that) and the other is capture sharpened at native pixel size and then uprezzed with Bicubic Smoother, aren't I just comparing apples with oranges? Also, when taking a image from 12.9 to 19.5MP is the ACR interpolating using its algorithm that is like Smoother?

In camera sharpening and acr 5.2

When I open RAW photo in acr although I have "apply sharpening to all images" option selected my pictures are not sharpened like when camera sharpens them. And it seems imposible to get acr to open raw to look as embeded .jpg ...they are overexposed by 1 stop and colors are of. If I use Nikon Capture NX Raw files look the same as embeded .jpg and it is sharpened in camera. I know i cant get the same looking picture in ACR as in NX but ACR is way off and it doesnt use camera sharpening at all.

The preference option you refer to (i.e., "apply sharpening to all images") means that sharpening -- if any -- will get applied to the image when you open the image in PS or save it as a rendered file (i.e., a TIFF or JPEG) to disk. The alternative (preview images only) means that you can preview any sharpening within CR, but that the sharpening won't get applied to the rendered file when you save it out or open it into PS.
This is separate from the actual controls that govern how much sharpening gets applied to the image. For that, visit the Detail tab. The default amount is 25. If that is too low for your taste, bump it up. You'll also want to tweak the other sliders (Radius, Detail, Masking) for best results.
CR does not use the in-camera sharpening algorithms, nor does it use the NX sharpening algorithms.

Export with Photokit Sharpening

I am trying to figure out how to use the export function of LR to somehow export and sharpen with Photokit. There is a box for "post-processing" in the LR export window but I'm not sure if I need to make a droplet from CS3 or an action or what to get it to sharpen as I export. If a droplet needs to be made, how exactly is that done or does anyone have one that they have written already? Thanks.

ariaaudio, LR just invokes the droplet as if you dropped the file on it no matter where you export the file to. The droplet does not have to live in the same folder at all. The droplet does have to live in a specific folder where LR looks for export actions.
John, this depends on how you set it up. Do you let LR scale to the final size or do you include scaling in the photoshop action/droplet. In the last case, you could make a photoshop action that takes an input file, scales to a certain preset size, sharpens, converts to the final color space, lowers bit depth and then saves as a jpeg. I have a few of these. Unfortunately they are not very versatile as they will only work for a specific output size.

Sharpening on ACR does not appear on screen

I am using ACR 5.2, when I use the sharpening tools, I do not see any change in the picture (I do see a changes when I use "smart sharpening" on photoshop cs4).
another problem is -I am supposed to see different areas in white and black when I hit ALT in masking - but there is no change when I hit the ALT (with or without moving the slide).
Thanks for any help
Dani

> If not, what could we have done instead that would have got your attention?
Mmmm - Make sharpening visible at all zooms? :)
I really think you are fighting a losing battle there, Thomas. This is a WYSIWYG world and that is what people expect. You could put a big red "X" over the image at less than 100% zoom but people would ask what the X was for. Maybe you could overlay red text on the image that says "This effect is visible only at zooms 100% or greater" that only showed up at less than 100%.
I know the standard responses:
- Sharpening at less than 100% is not accurate. Why do you want a non-accurate view?
- Sharpening at all zooms would incur a performance penalty.
Regarding the first response:
- Photoshop already does it and it has arguably improved somewhat with OpenGL.
- Even if it is somewhat inaccurate some people are able to get a "feel" for the sharpness
- It is inaccurate if you are printing but not so bad if your output is for web or monitor use.
- It's not like every other operation in ACR and Photoshop proper is 100% guaranteed accurate - take viewing ProPhotoRGB on an average monitor, for example.
Regarding the second response:
- You know better than anyone the extent to which that is true . . .
- . . . but geez, I can do gradients and local adjustments now built on-the-fly from stored commands. Aren't you getting close to being able to do that for sharpening?
I would bet you that we will see all-zoom sharpening by CS6 (and your marketing folks will make sure it is highlighted as a great, new feature when that happens :) ), but it wouldn't be fair because you can influence the outcome. :)

Malfunction of Detail Sharpening in ACR

I'm using two Mac computers, both with PS CS5 12.0.4, ACR 6.6.0, and OS x10.6.8.
On one computer, PS and ACR work fine. On the other, I have the following problem:
When I apply Sharpening in the ACR Detail panel, setting all the sliders, then open the image in PS as a smart object, the sharpening has not taken effect on the image in PS.
When I re-open the image in ACR, I find that the Amount slider in the Sharpening panel has re-set itself to zero. The other sliders in the panel are still where I had set them.
However, the output sharpening in the ACR Workflow Options area does take effect in PS, and appears to be working fine.
I just re-installed everything, but no improvement.
As I said, it all works on the other computer, so I have a reference for what PS should do.
Any insights will be appreciated.

In case it might be useful in the future, here is what fixed hte problem.
I established another user account on my computer, and opened PS through that. The Detail/Sharpening worked fine. The defect was not present, showing that the problem was in my user directory and not in PS.
Back in the original account, I ran cs5cleanscript from Adobe.com to uninstall cs5 and all related files. It missed some, which I deleted, along with old files from previous PS and ACR found in users/name/library/preferences.
Reinstalled PS. It works.

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.

PhotoKit Sharpener or ACR?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for