Sharpening Question

My normal workflow is adjust image in ACR and then batch sharpen, resize and convert to desired profile in Photoshop. I have the old batch operations working in Lightroom by converting the Photoshop actions to droplets and putting them in the Lightroom Export Actions folder. I have also created a develop preset to disable sharpening in Lightroom. I can now mimic my old workflow and still get the advantage of all the new RAW processing features in Lightroom. My question is - is there a Lightroom equivalent to the ACR setting of "Apply sharpening to preview images only"? At present I must turn on sharpening to evaluate the image and then remember to turn it off before exporting it. Thanks.

Luke,
I am sooo glad I read your post. Because at least I know it can be done ... now.
AND, I love your solution to Sharpening ... and "now" I can see the value of "applying sharping to preveiw images only".
* I have not created any Action/Droplets in PS CS2 for what I want done ... but, I am curious how you Run a action to "Save to WEB" and get it into a folder that is "inside" the current folder?
When I do a "save for web in PS CS2" the save seems to remember the last folder you saved to ... so would that not mess up a action you are running on different folders of files?
*** Making this longer than it probably should be ... but, this is what I would like to do as an action ... is it possable?
On Export * DO you EXPORT AS A 8BIT,sRGB FILE???
I would like to ... run a action/droplet ... to go to PS CS2 and Run "Portrature" Plug-in on it's own layer at 40% opasity ... then Change Profile ... make a levels adjustment , sharpen ... save as jpg (for lab printing)in a New Folder "JPG" inside the current folder ... THEN go back on History before the change in color Profile and levels change .. AND change image size , sharpen .. save for WEB in a new folder "WEB" inside the current folder.
So, when I am done ... I have two new folders inside my current working folder with ... "JPG" my profiled JPG for Print Lab ... and "WEB" for web upload.
Thank you for any help you can give this "newbie" to LR and PS CS2 actions/droplets
HG

Similar Messages

Fraser/Schewe RWCR Book - Sharpening Question

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

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

Book printing turnaround time(Canada) and general sharpening question

Hi,
I am nearly finished a book in Aperture and have a couple of questions, one specific to Canada and another, more general question.
For those in Canada(or anybody else's experiences), how long does it take for the book to be published and sent out to you? My book project is to be a christmas gift and I would like to order one copy to proof, but if the turnaround is really long, then I would just order all the copies I need and hope everything turns out satisfactory.
The second concerns sharpening. Since the images are resized for the individual use on a page, how do you optimize the sharpening? Is it better to oversharpen, or resize and sharpen each image prior to placing in the book?
Thanks for any and all help. This is a first book so any other comments or suggestions would be appreciated!
Scott

Perhaps I can help with the first question. I tried the same approach and was quite happy with the first book quality; however, when I ordered several of the same book a few weeks later, I was very unhappy with the color casts and how they differed from the original book I had printed. The moral of the story is that the print quality is highly variable between printings.
Aves

Full screen sharpening question 3.0

Hello,
I notice that the sharpening applied in edited images is only visible full screen when you first zoom in and out.
When after that I look at another image and return to the first one the full screen sharpening is again not visible, and zooming in/out is needed to see it full screen again.
Is that normal ?
Thanks
Mark

It's still there in the final 3.2 version.
Would it be deliberate ?
When I open an image at full screen I see the sharpening applied only when a (doesn't matter which one) slider is moved.
Thanks Mark

Web Module Output Sharpening question

Is the web gallery output sharpening in LR2 only available when a web gallery template makes it available? I can't seem to find it under Output Settings for most of my installed gallery templates? I'm guessing that the developer has to make this available and/or the template has to be LR2 aware. Not sure though. Of course, it would be very convenient to make web gallery output sharpening available for any template installed.

I have to follow a somewhat convoluted workflow when doing my photobooks. But in a nutshell.
Import Raw Image from EOS 30D
Apply color correction and capture sharpening (I sharpen until it looks good onscreen)
Export images at their largest size to my Links folder for InDesign. (I design all of the photo book in InDesign.)
Once I know all the sizes for sure in InDesign, I run a script that takes each image into photoshop and sizes the images to 100% and imports them back into InDesign.
I take the sized down images back into LR2 and output sharpen them and update them in InDesign.
I know it's not the greatest workflow, but it seems the the easiest and quickest. I wish there was some way for InDesign and LR to communicate the correct image sizes. But I haven't discovered anything like that yet.

LR3 resizing algorithm fails/ export sharpening question

I have a contrasty b&w image with a severe grain effect added in SIlver Efex Pro. Exporting with resizing results in a gray and washed out image.
I fixed this by exporting without resizing, and resized externally using ImageMagick and the Lanczos filter (very slightly better for my image than the Mitchell filter).
I do of course though lose the opportunity to apply LRs export sharpening which is worrying. Not sure how to replicate this using ImageMagick. Anyone know?
Thanks,
Ian
ps Happy to supply files to anyone from Adobe who wants to look at the issue.

Bruce,
As you correctly noticed, the WxH ratio in export represents a canvas, into which the exported image is fit. Here are some illustrations on what the different settings mean:
For what you are trying to achieve, you have to crop the image to the correct dimensions before doing the export. If I had to do it, I would create virtual copies of the original image as the last step and give each virtual copy its own crop, then export the virtual copies.
Bruce in Philly wrote:
Also, when I spec a dimension, shouldn't the DPI gray out? What am not understanding here?
The DPI resolution has no meaning for the size of the resulting image if you specify pixels in your export dimensions. But the resolution tag is written into the image, which might affect the way an image is printed, depending on the printing application.
But if you specify your export dimensions in inches or cm, the resolution together with the dimensions in inch/cm determine the size of the resulting image in pixels. I.e. if you specify 5x7" and 300DPI, your exported images size will be 1500x2100 pixels.
Beat

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

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

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

Correcting blurred photos in premiere elements 11

I have checked several solutions to correcting blurred photos in premiere elements 11. Most of them turn out to be different versions and does not help me. I have had: in expert mode select photo, filter-other-high pass. I tried this and doesnt work. I believe if this is the way to correct blurred photos, I am missing a step somewhere. I have gone to enhance-adjust sharpness or unsharp. I must be doing something wrong. or can you correct blurred photo?

j strengh
What is the situation - I do not really see the typical 720 x 480 resolution vs HD resolution type of question. I am seeing it as a photo editing (sharpening) question which may or may not be related to further use of these photos in Premiere Elements 11.
Which of the following is applicable to your situation..
a. You have great looking photos saved on the computer hard drive, but, after you import them into Premiere Elements, they look blurry on the Timeline and you want to try to correct that
or
b. You have great looking photos, but, after you import them into Premiere Elements and burn them to DVD-VIDEO on DVD disc, the photos are blurry in the playback of the DVD-VIDEO with your TV's DV player
or
c. None of the above, rather you are trying to improve the sharpness of your photos in general using Photoshop Elements Full Editor/Filter Menu/Other/High Pass. If so, have you tried the Unsharp Mask under the Enhance Menu?
Consider the distinction between sharpening an image (contrast changes) and trying to correct a bad blur in the original.
From all that you have written, I suspect that this involves "c" and how to get the best results for sharpening an image in Photoshop Elements. If that is the case, you might seek input from the Photoshop Elements Forum here on that. Another possibility is that you may be creating pixelation in your images if you are up-sizing your images in the search for higher resolution and better quality.
Please give as much more detail to make sure that your question and its answer can be targeted correctly.
Please do not forget the follow up which is the key to success.
Thank you.
ATR

Lightroom to Photoshop CC noise/sharpening workflow question

Most of my images I process 100% in Lightroom. HOWEVER, I do at times need to send and image from Lightroom over to Photoshop CC to finish. Then when finished in CC the image goes back to Lightroom 5 as a TIFF. My question is should I apply sharpening and noise reduction in LR5 prior to sending the image to CC? Or should I apply sharpening and noise reduction after the end of the round trip to CC and back when the image arrives back in LR5 as a TIFF. And yes I have tried a number of different ways. I have tried sending the same image from LR5 with sharpening and NR applied as I would if I were finished. I have sent the same image over to CC with just the default sharpen and noise settings AND I have zeroed out the settings. I sent all images to CC as 16bit TIFF. I tried those various ways and have gotten mixed results. So I was looking for someone with expertise as to what the best procedure is to take when using this workflow.

Getting mixed results is normal as it depends on the initial image and what happens in PS. If you’re changing the overall toning or local contrast in PS then the noise will be different and probably needs more tweaking afterwards.
I would generally go part way toward my final Detail settings in LR, then do what I have to do in PS, then do more in either PS or LR as appropriate.
What I usually do in PS is use Smart Sharpen after I’ve resized down to whatever my final size is—usually my screen size for desktop wallpaper, because I like how PS SS works, an in that case I’ve probably done all my Detail work in LR and only do the resize and SS in PS.

Capture Sharpen (and other questions)?

I have been a very big advocate of capture sharpening for fine art workflow for more than a few years now (landscape fine art gallery enlargements). I was under the impression that in ACR (7.1) by using the Radius to the left (0.5) and Detail to the right (100) I was maximizing the deconvolution aspect of sharpening and maybe even drawing out a hair more real detail from the raw file.
Today I did a test on a high frequency raw image (trees) and had my settings at Amount 45, Radius 0.5, Detail 0, and masking at 20. But then I also did it on the same image, this way: I brought a second version of the raw file into PS with no capture sharpening, and saved it as a tiff, then I brought that tiff back into ACR 7.1 and then did the capture sharpening. In Photoshop CS6 I put them on top of each other as layers (one raw sharpened and one tiff sharpened) and at all viewing distances they were exactly the same to my eye (I did notice that the histograms of each were very, very slightly different).
But I could not see a single pixel or edge change anywhere in the image even at 1600% viewing distance. This seems to blow away my impression about deconvolution sharpening actually drawing out more real detail from a raw file. I totally understand that sharpening is not real detail, but on this forum years ago I came to believe that somehow a bit more real detail might be accessed in raw by the aforementioned settings. Any thoughts?
Second question: do you really think there is a quantitative quality difference in detail (or the illusion of) in an image that has capture sharpening applied in ACR (7.1) at its native size, then is enlarged substantially with further rounds of sharpening and grain simulation in the end (versus just sizing it up soft and doing all the sharpening at the end)? I did testing on this years ago and it seemed to be noticably better overall. I guess I'm just second guessing it again.
My basic workflow is capture sharpen Radius 05. / Detail 100, then upsize with Smoother (40, 50, 60, 70 inches...) then do some moderate high pass, then advanced use of unsharp mask (LAB - L channel - or Luminosity - RGB - also blending/blend if sliders for fall off if necessary) then ACR grain simulation (on a seperate layer - not to create grainy photos - but create the illusion of more detail and to camouflage artifacting). I believe after years of testing and practice this seems to be about as good as it gets for my content.
Lastly, smart sharpen... I have not used this much, but do you think this workflow might benefit from using it instead of USM (with the more deconvolution - lens blur/more accurate) type of sharpen near the end)?
Side note: for those involved with focus bracketing (for increased depth of field with the sharpest f/stop) it is common knowledge that capture sharpening at the raw stage (before the Auto Align and Auto Blend in PS) confuses the auto blend algorithm as to what are the real sharper pixels. So, we don't capture sharpen those images (this is common practice).
And after blending the images (Auto Blend) we usually just size up (for enlargement) and go. Now I am thinking that after the focus blending is finished and the file is flattened it might be a good idea to bring that tif file back into ACR and apply a little bit of capture sharpening before the upsize. Does that make sense to you?
Cheers for your time and feedback!
Message linebreaks added by: PECourtejoie

Disclaimer: I did not entirely understand the original post, and maybe some of this does not apply in your multi-step process, so take with salt...
ACRFREAK wrote:
With low ISO shots (100) I always try to use the least noise reduction possible in ACR (less is more approach) which means on correctly exposed images ("to the right") on Canon cameras, my ACR settings are often 0 on luminance and 0-5 on color noise.
At ISO 100, I rarely use any luminance noise reduction, however my experience is that even under ideal circumstances including low ISO, a modicum of color noise reduction is still essential for optimum image quality. - it is almost never desirable to set color noise reduction to zero, IMO - YMMV. (Note: in NX2 - you don't even get a choice about it - (true) color noise reduction will be applied, as Nikon sees fit).
Note: ACR's color noise reduction algorithm is image adaptive (it's more "aggressive" on higher ISO shots). You shouldn't see much (if any real) detail loss with color noise reduction at 25 on ISO 100 shots, eh?
ACRFREAK wrote:
My theory is that I am trying to keep a much of the fine detail as possible. Also the reason I like the 0.5 radius and 100 detail.
In my opinion, ideally, the sharpen settings should depend on the photo - type, and inherent focus... (.5/100 may be great for ultra-clean, ultra-sharp landscapes, but may not be appropriate for portraits...)
But different strokes for different folks. (and I don't know what kinds of photos you mainly (or only) shoot).
Rob

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.

Sharpening export workflow question

I have a sharpening workflow question. Say I have pictures from a portrait session I just finished. I have to send 10 pictures the client ordered to a print lab and I also will make some small facebook sized pictures and upload them to my business facebook page. The level of sharpening needed for large prints (I upload to print lab as RGB JPEGS) and sharpening needed for the very small sRGB facebook-sized pictures is different. In Lightroom I have the option to set the sharpening on export and have a bunch of presets that alter the export size, color space, sharpening, etc(WHCC print lab, facebook, Client CD, etc). I don't see how to do that in Aperture. I see they have the option if you have a printer, but not on normal export.
For those of you that have to export batches of pictures in multiple different sizes (with different levels of sharpening), what is your workflow? I could use some photoshop droplets/actions after Aperture export but I was hoping there was a way to avoid the extra step. Am I overlooking an export feature? The BorderFX plug-in looks like the only other option.
Thank you in advance for time and help!
Scott

Frank Scallo Jr wrote:
The thing is guys - Once a file is sized down it WILL lose sharpening - what we are doing is sharpening the full size RAW file or rather what the full size output would be like. Once we export a version sized down it will lose some of the 'bite'. LR has sharpening options on 'output' which is not only smart but a necessity. Adobe realizes that output for screen needs another sharpen. Apple either doesn't know or didn't bother. It makes ANY output for screen less than best.
Bear in mind that there seem to be two separate issues going on here - sharpening adjustments not being applied on export, and resizing.
As far as resizing is concerned, Aperture appears to use something roughly equivalent to Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper setting. Because of this I've never had much problem with Aperture's exports when used for the web, but obviously everyone's taste for sharpening differs which is why an option for output sharpening would be good.
Sharpening adjustments not being applied on export is a separate issue and should be reported via the feedback form ASAP by everyone who is experiencing the bug.
Now printing is another animal - I wouldn't print directly from RAW in aperture either if I'm printing small. Again, LR beats Aperture here as well since they include output sharpening for print.
Aperture has had output sharpening for printing since 2.0 came out (unless it in was 1.5). In A3 you need to turn on 'More Options' and scroll down, I can't remember where it is in A2. I don't know how effective it is as I print via a lab, but it's there and it's been there for a long time...
Ian

Filter Question 4: Sharpen's Luminosity option

When using the very basic Sharpen filter (not the FX Plug one), the Luminosity option appears to be unchecked by default. FCP Help doesn't seem to offer any suggestions as to when it would be appropriate to turn it on.
With the very small amount of Sharpening I'm applying, the difference between having the Luminosity checkbox on or off is extremely subtle. But am I correct in concluding from my squinting eyes that having it On keeps certain colors from slightly oversaturating, due to the contrast-increasing effect of the filter itself?
But that would seem to suggest having the Luminosity On would be the default setting-- so is there something else about that option of which I should be aware -- or wary of?
Thanks,
John B.
Toronto

Andy Mees wrote:
What does all that mean? It means it would be appropriate to use this option when you think it looks better if you do.
Agreed (and echoing David's point). But it also means:
Why can't Apple's "Help" documentation provide quick access to a simple paragraph as succinct, as informative, and as helpful as the one YOU just wrote! With hyperlinks that would let me learn more about "3X3 convolutions" if I so choose? The point is, even if my understanding of the tech aspect is minimal, at least that was an explanation of what the different parts of the filter DO.
Now actually using that same filter in a tasteful way obviously involves testing, experimentation, and lots of trial-and-error experience. My annoyance with Cupertino crowd is when they don't seem to want to tell us anything about a particular function whatsoever -- as if to say: "Oh it's much too complicated to try and document -- just click away on the buttons and eventually you'll figure out what it does".
I'm not saying the "figuring out" still doesn't have to happen -- but please just give us a general idea to get the ball rolling. Either that, or hire someone like Andy Mees to make the Help files a bit more Helpful!
jb

Sharpen tool question

I am going through a final edit of photos and am trying to figure out a way to either a, add the sharpen tool to the tool bar on the lower left hand side of the screen b, have a shortcut key to get the sharpen brush (i see on line that it is control v but that is not working for me or c, find some other way that lets me get to the sharpen tool quickly and easily without having to hit the drop down and scroll to the bottom. There has to be a way...

Frank -- my apologies! You are 100% correct. I must have added that to my custom command set. I have no memory of adding it.
{Red-faced Emoji}
It does illustrate something for this thread. The OP can follow your advice and add the Sharpen Quick Brush to his/her command set and use it with a keyboard shortcut.
I find no way to activate a Brush from a Brick via the keyboard.
The commands "Select Burn Tool" and "Select Dodge Tool" do nothing on my system except remove the focus from the current tool.
Here, fwiw, is my current command set for Quick Brushes:
Again, sorry for attempting a correction that was wrong.

"To sharpen or not to sharpen" That's the question.

The doyen of "Photoshop Elements 4", Scott Kelby, writes..
"I sharpen every digital camera photo, either to bring back the original crispness that gets lost during the correction process, or to help fix a photo that's slightly out of focus.
Either way I haven't met a digital camera photo that didn't need a little sharpening."
As a newie to digital photography I'm finding that following this suggestion sometimes results in less realistic pictures than the originals.
Comment would be welcome.
Cliff (In sunny, hot, scorching Spain..)

My preference is usually the following, or something close:
1. Duplicate background layer
2. Go to Filter>other>high pass. Try radius = 1.5
3. Set blendong mode to either overlay or vivid light.
If I remember correctly, Barbara Brundage suggested 1.5 and overlay in her book The Missing Manual.
Vivid light will give it an extra pop. Sometimes good, sometimes not.
See what you think.
I agree with Colin, there are no formulas for this. It's probably different for each photo and all depends on your preferences.

Sharpening Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for