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

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.

  • 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.

  • Starting over in ACR

    I am working through examples on a DVD that came with a book on PS CS5. When I copy an image from the DVD to a Temp folder on the heard drive Bridge cannot "see" it. However, Bridge can browse the DVD, and I can open an image in ACR. So here's the problem, after I work through the steps in the book I get excellent results, now I want to work through it again to reinforce the steps. Now however, when I re-open the same DVD image it opens in ACR with the adjustments applied and the image already cropped. So I tried Develop Settings > Clear Settings (hardly intuitive!). I got a warning that the file was read only. Well I knew that, it's on a DVD, but the settings are being stored somewhere. Thnking that they might be stored in some Temp file I tried closing PS and Bridge, then re-starting both. Same problem. So where are the settings being stored? How do I delete them so that I can start over from scratch?
    Thanks for you time,
    David

    Thanks for the information. I found the database buried deep in Documents & Settings. However, even after purging the cache when I re-open the DVD image the adjustments are restored to default, but the image is still cropped. By chance I found that selecting the Crop tool the whole image appeared and the cropping could be changed. I would have thought that the image could have been restored to the original with a single button to start over. I guess it's just me, I couldn't even find a Reply button in the Forum so am having to resort to replying via e-mail.
    Thanks again,
    David
    Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 18:16:25 -0600
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: Starting over in ACR
    In your Camera Raw Preferences/General, what are your settings regarding Save image settings in:
    If you have it set to Camera Raw database, ACR will store the adjustments settings in the database so even an image on a DVD will be remembered...
    Note, you can always return to the default Camera Raw settings by selecting 'Camera Raw Defaults' in the flyout menu...
    >

  • 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 - DPP vs ACR

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

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

  • Input (capture) sharpening workflow in ACR 4.3.1

    At the suggestion of another member, I'm posting this here in addition to posting on Windows Photoshop forum:
    I shoot raw, always, and have avoided using Camera Raw in my workflow until recently (4.3.1), because so much time and organization effort is now saved by including Camera Raw 4.3.1 in my workflow, where it wasn't in previous versions.
    My problem is that I had been trained in numerous Canon tutorials to always perform input sharpening as the first step in the workflow, using a radius of 0.3 and an amount of 300 in Photoshop CS2, in order to remove the effects of the camera sensor's anti-alias filter.
    This is only possible in Photoshop, since the Camera Raw controls limit those parameters to 0.5 and 150. My workflow is first forced into Photoshop proper followed by Camera Raw, if I am to follow Canon's recommendation, which means I lose one of the principle benefits of using Camera Raw 4.3.1.
    I have reviewed many posts and tutorials relating to sharpening in Lightroom, Camera Raw, and Photoshop, and none of these documents refer to input sharpening as part of the workflow, but to the use of sharpening as a creative tool in image manipulation or for optimizing for media, etc.
    Thanks for any advice.

    Guy,
    first thing to note, the Amount and Radius parameters in ACR and in Photoshop's USM filter are on different scales; you cannot compare their numerical values directly (Jeff, please correct me if I'm wrong!).
    Second thing, of course you're never supposed to apply Sharpening for Source first (in Photoshop) and then take the file back to ACR to tweak it further. If you don't want to use ACR's new capture sharpening feature then disable it and fully develop your raw image in ACR, applying white balance, exposure, brightness, saturation, noise reduction, and lens correction settings as required---and THEN, to the fully developed TIFF, PSD, or JPEG file, you'd apply Sharpening for Source first thing in Photoshop.
    By the way, I don't like ACR's new sharpening feature too much. Lately I developed the notion that Sharpening for Content (as presented in Bruce's four-stage sharpening workflow, i. e. Source, Content, Creative, and Output; see his book "Real-World Image Sharpening") conceptually belongs into one category with Creative Sharpening, not with Sharpening for Source. So the concept of Capture Sharpening---which combines Sharpening for Source and Sharpening for Content into one single sharpening stage---seems reasonable technically but not conceptually. The parameters for Sharpening for Source depend solely on the properties of the image-acquiring device (i. e. scanner or digital camera). The parameters for Sharpening for Content and for Creative Sharpening both depend on image content as well as on the author's taste and intentions. In my opinion, Sharpening for Content *is* a sort of a kind of Creative Sharpening---so combining Sharpening for Source and Sharpening for Content into one Capture Sharpening stage makes sense only when processing one image at a time (for the one-image-at-a-time workflow, I do like, and use, ACR's capture sharpening feature).
    When processing a whole batch of raw images which come all from the same source, it usually makes sense to automatically apply the same degree of Sharpening for Source to all of them but to apply any further sharpening (namely for Content and Creative) individually to each image. That's why I usually disable ACR's sharpening altogether and stick to Bruce's four-stage sharpening workflow, applying Sharpening for Source via Photoshop's batch automation.
    -- Olaf

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • And is over-ruled by null prompt?

    Hi,
    I have a prompt which (simplified) does the equivalent of when letter in A,B,C AND when letter is prompted.
    Before I apply prompt choices on a dashboard prompt the A,B,C is not applying on a report on the same page. My default for the prompt is all values, but the all values is specific value limited to a list A,B,C.
    Anyone know a fix / workaround for this?
    Version 11.1.1.6.0
    thanks,
    Robert.

    Found my own fix by adding all values to the default same as the list that limits which choices are allowed.
    A little alarming that AND conditions become OR conditions in the case of ALL CHOICES....
    Robert.

  • 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.

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

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

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

  • ACR 4.41 capture sharpening

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

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

  • 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

Maybe you are looking for