Sharpening upon jpeg export

I'm surprised that Aperture does not allow sharpening of jpeg output. Sharpening the master before reduction is not the same. All experienced image makers know that sharpening needs to be applied after resizing. I don't want to sharpen my master. I always sharpen for output (I've always used photoshop). How could Apple leave this feature out?

My understanding was that nothing actually happened to the files ("nondestructive") until they were exported...at which time the adjustments were applied. You were simply seeing a preview of the adjustments.
I'm not a programmer so I could be completely wrong and if so, I completely agree that the sharpening should be applied as the final step.

Similar Messages

Unwanted two-sided white border upon JPEG export

I'm having an export issue in Illustrator.
I've created an artboard in Illustrator to the dimensions I need the final piece to be (for web). I did the design, went to export as JPEG and the saved JPEG file has a fat white border on just the top and right hand side of the art. There is no lingering empty text box or anything in the upper right that would make it include the white space in the exported file. I've tried exporting as a GIF, PNG, and JPEG with no success. I've tried making the background picture larger than the artboard and that didn't work.
Artwork is below. Notice fat white border. Any ideas?
Thanks

In the Save For Web dialog, click on the Image Size tab and check the box for Clip to Artboard.

ICC Profiles: Why No Embedding Upon JPEG Export?

Hi all! I'm sure this has been discussed here before, but a forum search revealed many unrelated threads. So here's my question: why doesn't Lightroom support embedding ICC profiles? The lack of this feature seems more of a design issue than something they haven't had time to add, so I'm curious to know if anyone knows why Adobe has chosen to skip this feature. I'm no ICC expert, so perhaps there's a good reason, but it would be nice to have it as an option to get JPEG images that match the ICC profile of my monitor...
Anyone have any insight on this issue?

>What ICC profile does it embed then since it doesn't offer the user a choice?
It offers the user a choice between sRGB, adobeRGB and prophotoRGB. It always embeds the profile. You can tell whether the profile is embedded in lots of programs. One of them is preview in mac os X for example. Another is photoshop.
>let's say that I'm sending an image off to get printed at an online printer. What ICC profile would I want to have embedded in the JPEG?
You want to use a working space profile such as sRGB. your monitor's profile is only meaningful to you as there is no second monitor like yours in the world. If the printer is good, they will convert your image from your monitor's profile to their printer's profile, but very few online labs do this and it is usually a recipe for bad prints. Most just assume your image is in sRGB, whether it is tagged/embedded or not. Your safest bet therefore is sRGB. If the lab/printer indicates that they really color manage and they seem to know what they are talking about, you can try using a wider space such as adobeRGB or even prophotoRGB.

Export sharpening with JPEG's any different in 1.1?

I'm considering making the jump to Aperture and was wondering if one particular issue has been considered in the 1.1 update - JPEG export over-sharpening. Can anyone shed some light on whether Apple turned down the sharpening or if there is a way to control it on export now?
Thanks.
Anthony

I’m very disappointed to report that I see NO
improvement on JPEG export of RAW files in the1.1
version of Aperture.
I am still getting very pixilated jpeg images after
export from RAW, they are garbage and unusable. I
have changed my export setting presets to use the
highest quality (12) and exported at 100%, and turned
off all sharpening and noise reduction. Still the
exported JPEG’s look terrible. I’m using a Canon 5D
and working with ISO 100 files that are well exposed
and in perfect focus.
These pictures are not even worthy of emailing.
Does anyone have any suggestions or work-arounds they
have found? Is anyone getting good RAW exports to
JPEG?
OK, I think I was totally off base and owe Aperture an apology. I was posting one of the effected images to SmugMug when I noticed the photo looked fine in SmugMug, even at original size. This is the same photo that was very pixilated on my Macs monitor. I then emailed the same picture and looked at it on another computer, and again there was no problem with the photo. After checking a few other things it appears that the application Preview is enlarging my photos beyond actual size when I select actual size from the view options. Since the image is being enlarged by Preview beyond the actual size it is causing the pixilated problem. I’m not sure what’s causing this but every jpeg I open with Preview behaves the same way. I’m using a Quad G5 and a 30 inch Cinema Display.
Has anyone else experienced this issue? I just moved over to the Mac a few months ago so please excuse me if there is something obvious that I’m unaware of with this issue.
I am sorry for the false alarm.

JPEG Export Looks Saturated in Internet Explorer

I see this question in many forums and online but without a solution.
JPEG exports (sRBG) look overly saturated when viewed in Internet Explorer browser, including when uploading/viewing in Facebook, etc, etc. In other words, the colors looks different between Lightroom and Internet Explorer. (Colors looks the same between Lightroom and Photoshop though.)
As point of reference, when you download a sample JPEG image from Canon EOS's website (used to show sample images from their cameras) you see that those images also use sRGB profile. They also look exactly the same no matter how you view them (Lightroom, Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.).
What is Lightroom doing to photos upon export to JPEG and you need Lightroom or Photoshop to see the same colors?
I saw some talk about it had to do with Lightroom presets and that you had to zero those out? Any ideas from Windows users?

Have you got Firefox or Safari on your machine? In which case, how do the images look in either of those browsers? Or, if you're using Windows 7, how do the images look in Windows photo viewer?
Also, can you say what monitor you are using please?
I think it might be a colour management issue. Internet Explorer is not colour managed (not even IE9), Lightroom and Photoshop are colour managed, so is Windows 7 photo viewer (but not the XP equivalent), so are Firefox and Safari (but not Chrome). When there's a difference between how something looks in an non-colour-managed program and colour-manged programs then it's worth checking for colour management issues.
If your monitor has a wider gamut than sRGB, then you would expect IE9 and other non-managed programs to look over-saturated.

Lightroom 4.4 jpeg export VERY noisy...HELP!

Hi all,
I have Googled and quite aware of the noisy jpeg output for v5 onwards.
But I'm still using 4.4 and all I found on Google is threads for v5.
Has anyone experienced this noisy jpeg export issue?
Here's a screengrab comparing the two.

If you're seeing a reduction of noise in the Export when you increase the Lum NR slider, then it's not a bug preventing the Lum NR from being applied.
Besides increasing the noise-reduction and not sharpening the remaining noise during Export, the other thing to do is use sharpen masking to prevent non-edges from being sharpened. You use the Mask slider in the sharpen section to accomplish this.
If you hold down the Alt key while moving the Mask slider you can see what areas will have sharpening applied. Make sure that it is only the edges, not the areas between where noise is the only detail or texture. The mask slider will probably be close to 100 for optimal results with a noisy image.
You should expect there to be a little grain left in the image.

Lightroom JPEG export VS Photoshop Image Processor

Hey guys:
Long time photoshop and lightroom user (long time user of all things Adobe). First post here in the forums. I did a search for my question but I think it was too specific, so it returned zero results.
My question is about Lightroom's JPEG export vs Photoshops Image Processor. When I export a RAW file to JPEG from Lightroom, the file size is freaking huge. The JPEG is as big as my original RAW file (~25mb). Settings are set to default - 100 quality. Everything else remains untouched.
However, when I use Photoshop's image processor (I launch it through Bridge, easier that way for me) and process the RAW images that way, my JPEGs are roughly 5-10mb in size. Settings in Image Processor are quality 10 and thats it. No actions being run or anything.
Can anyone shed some light as to why Lightroom exports JPEGs that are roughly 2-4 times the size of Photoshop's JPEGs? My initial thoughts are that the 100 quality setting in Lightroom is more like Photoshop's quality 12 (that always makes me think of Spinal Tap - "Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?" "These go to eleven.") Ideally, exporting out of Lightroom would be much easier for my workflow.
Thanks in advance.
-The Doctor

DrMilesBennell wrote:
Can anyone shed some light as to why Lightroom exports JPEGs that are roughly 2-4 times the size of Photoshop's JPEGs? My initial thoughts are that the 100 quality setting in Lightroom is more like Photoshop's quality 12 (that always makes me think of Spinal Tap - "Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?" "These go to eleven.") Ideally, exporting out of Lightroom would be much easier for my workflow.
You are correct: LR Quality 100 = PS Quality 12
Despite LR having 101 Quality settings (0 to 100) it actually only has 12 Quality settings the same as PS 'Baseline Standard':
JPEG Quality Setting Comparison
PS
LR
LR Range
Typical Reduction
0
0
0-7%
11%
1
10
8-15%
23%
2
20
16-23%
14%
3
30
24-30%
14%
4
35
31-38%
16%
5
40
39-46%
24%
6
50
47-53%
4%
7
55
54-61%
27%
8
65
62-69%
25%
9
70
70-76%
31%
10
80
77-84%
35%
11
90
85-92%
41%
12
100
93-100%
I keep a small copy of the above table taped to my monitor. I chose the numbers under the 'LR' column for the 12 steps (not AA's) to make it easier to remember. In actuality ANY number in the LR Range column will produce the same results for each step.
Under the 'Typical Reduction' column notice the small amount of reduction for PS 6 (LR 47-53%) Quality setting. If interested why AND why you probably shouldn't use PS 7 (LR 54-61%) Quality setting see this post:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/5641903#5641903

Lightroom vs jpeg export

Hi,
My images do not look the same as the way they appear in lightroom. Seems like they are loosing contrast/shadows.

Yes I am using sRGB color profile when exporting.
This is my screenshot of the image in Lightroom vs Jpeg Export on the right.

JPEG exports - "optimize to file size"

just saw this tucked away in somebody's lengthy post, but i think it merits its own thread.
it would be very useful, and isnt very difficult, to implement a jpeg export option for auto-setting the quality slider based on "desired file size".
for instance, my web products need jpegs w/ a max of 800k. in PS, i have to dork around w/ the preview sliders to get this. in LR, there isnt a way. preferred for both would be UI for inputting the desired size and let the cpu do its job.
this would rock.
thanks
matt

Yes. Generally speaking, would be nice to know the exported file size in terms of MB / KB, in addition to pixel dimensions which are already there.
Gilles.

Adding crop marks in jpeg export

Hi All,
Is is possible to add crop marks in jpeg export similar to what we have in pdf export.
I see SnapshotUtils class but could not see any method to set crop marks.
What I need to do to set crop marks?
Regards,
Alam

Well, since there is no Crop Marks option when doing a JPEG Export (Snapshot) by hand, I would be very surprised if there were a plug-in API for it.
So I think you'll have to add your own Crop Marks before you do the JPEG Export. It isn't really that hard ... just a little tedious. You can get the general idea from the CropMarks.jsx script that comes with InDesign.

JPEG Export Problem

A few days ago, someone was commenting on funny square boxes in JPEG exports that occurred at places with spot touch up was performed. I have now experienced the same problem with a single touch up.
D70 RAW file-->single spot touch up-->export to a hi-resolution (best possible) JPEG--> ugly spot at site of touch up.
image available at www.printroom.com/pro/e2photo in gallery "aperture"
The previous thread was locked, but I never saw an answer to the problem
G5 iMac OS 10.4.3
any help would be greatly appreciated
steven

hi. apologies for delay in responding - have been trying to find some time to do some testing
i removed and re-installed the mogrify plugin and this seemed to do the trick. i couldn't replicate with the standard export, so i assume it was just a mogrify issue

JPEG export preferences problems

Hi.
I have indesig cs5.5 and tryed set export resolution and jpeg color space. But in my computer i can't because this properties don't existe.
In other computer this script read ok.
below the JPEG export preferences properties.
The script
tell application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5"
          tell JPEG export preferences
                    set JPEG export range to export range
                    set Exporting Spread to false
                    set Page String to "2"
                    set export resolution to 72
                    set jpeg color space to RGB
                    set JPEG Quality to low
          end tell
end tell
The properties
{«class jpEr»:72, JPEG Quality:low, Page String:"2", JPEG export range:export range, JPEG Rendering style:baseline encoding, Exporting Spread:false, parent:application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5", object reference:JPEG export preferences of application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5"}
Thanks

What was resolution in CS4 became exportResolution in CS5 (and CS5.5). Is it possible you mapped "Adobe InDesign CS5.5" to a CS4 installation on the machine it doesn't work on?
Also: I'm not an Applescript expert (or even really competent in it), so I'm probably going to embarrass myself, but... Have you tried copying and pasting the script's contents into a new file on the machine where it doesn't work rather than running the (compiled, or whatever) .scpt file?
Jeff

Jpeg-export - metafile error - errorcode 2 or errorcode 0

Hello,
i want to export my Report-Sheet as an jpeg from an serial analysis for every step. After the first step the jpeg-export fails with following error message: (in german) "Es befindet sich keinMetafile in der Zwischenablage. Fehlercode 2" or in english: "there are no metafile at the clipboard. error code 2" the failing command looks like this:
for i = 1 to 12
Call PICEXPORT("D:\MFriedrich\" & messname & "Kraftanzeige_" & k & "0kmh.JPG","JPEG",1,1024,,"RGB 24 YUV 444",100,"JPEG",0)
next
The files and folders do exist.
What can i do? I seems, that a temporary picture will not be create at the clipboard.
DIAdem 9.10.2345 ServicePack 2b
WinXP
Modul: Diadem-Script

Hello!
I tried by my computer and could export in a for loop the Report in a JPEG without any error.
Could you post the whole code you are doing in the loop?
So I can try do reproduce the problem
Regards
Ken

JPEG Export fails in some way

Hello guys,
we have developed a JPEG Export Plugin for InDesign server that worked fine for several years now, never having any problems. Now a strange issue occur and I need some help. When exporting an preview image of one page (containing textframes with text and tables) the preview image is correct if the dpi is smaller than 72 dpi (100% in our application). But when the dpi is equal or greater than 72 the text appears correctly on the image but the tables are missing. This problem occurs on CS4 but not on CS5 server, but there is no difference between the plugin implementation (beside the changes that were obligatory for porting the plugin to CS5). Maybe this is a known issue or someone has solution for it?
Here is the difference between the exported images (smaller than 72 dpi and greater or equal 72 dpi):

I do move some photos to OnOne or PS (for editing), then back to Aperture. In Aperture I would select-all (click) the photos I wanted to send to Sam's for printing then drag the selected items (all at the same time) onto the Sam's web site for processing/priniting. Another thought - on occassion I would have to switch-out flash-cards during shooting.
Ah there you go both pieces of the puzzle solved.
You're getting the Tiff files in Aperture from the use of the external editor. In the Aperture->Preferences->Export window is the settings for what file type to use with an external editor I'm sure your setting is Tiff.
And then by dragging the file out of Aperture rather then exporting it you are getting the Tiff.
IMPORTANT Point:
By dragging the files out of Aperture you are not really exporting them you are getting the Aperture generated preview (or in the case of the Tiff files the original). The settings in the Export window have NO effect on the image when you drag it out. In all likelihood you are not getting the size and/or resolution you think you are.
You should be exporting the versions by using the Export Versions button in the Export window. Once the versions are exported to a folder on your disk you can then drag those to the print web site. This will ensure you are getting the image size and resolution you want.
regards

Jpeg export output is 'smudgy' vs Lr develop display

Hello Gang -
I've been blaming smudged output on facebook & Flickr - but now I've seen the true culprit !
My Jpeg export output is quite 'smudgy' vs the Develop display - and even when I use export "Email" default it is still smudgy while the Develop module displays great detail...
what needs to be tweaked please?
much thanks ~

Hello -
Ok - interesting:
I imported a jpeg into Lr and it looks very good - long story short - Windows Photo Viewer sucks
Viewed in Paint - looks good, viewed in FastPictureViewer - looks good.
Viewed in flickr - Bad. I'm installing Chrome to see if its a firefox issue
I use firefox browser, I use sRGB as the export color space (although I see no difference among the 3 default kinds.
I canot find info as to whether WPV makes use of embedded icc profiles, and after googling and reading - I have not found info as to how I would know if I am "even including an embedded profile with the files"
Flickr and Facebook display my jpegs exactly as I see them in Windows Photo Viewer - which is different from how I see it in Lr's Develop Module - in that dark brown & blacks look smudgy with much reduced detail
Bob_Peters wrote:
Does Win7 "Window Photo Viewer" make use of embedded icc profiles?
What color space are you using for the exported JPEG files? Are you even including an embedded profile with the files?
What do Flickr and Facebook do when confronted with an image containing a color profile?
What browser are you using to view the Flickr and Facebook images?

Sharpening upon jpeg export

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for