How do you sharpen?
Discussion
I'm sat editing a few photographs from a walk yesterday, and I would usually let LR do it's usual default of 40 sharpening and then export to PS and use a 1.5-3px Unsharp Mask set to Hard or Vivid Light.
I'm wondering if there are "better" ways, so: How do you sharpen your images?
I've just noticed this isn't what I do at all, I use a High Pass filter.
I'm wondering if there are "better" ways, so: How do you sharpen your images?
I've just noticed this isn't what I do at all, I use a High Pass filter.
Edited by MikeGTi on Tuesday 30th December 15:30
Never quite understood the sharpening thing. I work as a TV Cameraman and with live HD stuff, focus is very critical. No edit to sort any probs out after 
My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
croyde said:
Never quite understood the sharpening thing. I work as a TV Cameraman and with live HD stuff, focus is very critical. No edit to sort any probs out after
My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
When you resize for web, you lose clarity. Like all here I use unsharp mask to get it back to how it looked full size. If you don't sharpen it looks crap.My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
croyde said:
Never quite understood the sharpening thing. I work as a TV Cameraman and with live HD stuff, focus is very critical. No edit to sort any probs out after
Video processing inside your TV camera performs exactly the same functionality as the Unsharp Mask although it's called Contour Correction or Detail (& there maybe more than one to adjust). As part of the camera setup the engineers should adjust this & match the amount of adjustment across all the cameras being used. If too much is used the edges of objects start to visibly ring & skin tones can show an orange peel effect but it's always a temptation to go for just that bit more sharpness.It's not a case of sorting it out afterwards, someone has already set it up before you get to the camera.
You actually have another instance of it controlled by the peaking knob on your viewfinder, although it doesn't matter to anyone else if you wind too much on as only you can see it.
Mr Pointy said:
croyde said:
Never quite understood the sharpening thing. I work as a TV Cameraman and with live HD stuff, focus is very critical. No edit to sort any probs out after
Video processing inside your TV camera performs exactly the same functionality as the Unsharp Mask although it's called Contour Correction or Detail (& there maybe more than one to adjust). As part of the camera setup the engineers should adjust this & match the amount of adjustment across all the cameras being used. If too much is used the edges of objects start to visibly ring & skin tones can show an orange peel effect but it's always a temptation to go for just that bit more sharpness.It's not a case of sorting it out afterwards, someone has already set it up before you get to the camera.
You actually have another instance of it controlled by the peaking knob on your viewfinder, although it doesn't matter to anyone else if you wind too much on as only you can see it.
croyde said:
Never quite understood the sharpening thing. I work as a TV Cameraman and with live HD stuff, focus is very critical. No edit to sort any probs out after
My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
I'm a Nikon DSLR man (who used to work in TV post production) and I'm yet to find a modern AF-S lens that even gets close to my older AF-D lenses for sharpness.My all singing and dancing Nikkor lenses for my DSLR seem to be soft as a default yet cheap old crap from the days of having to sort your own f stop and exposure are pin sharp.
Just wondering?
At present I use a 15 year old 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, along with prime 24mm, 35mm and 85mm AF-D lenses. The one AF-S lens I own is a 50mm f/1.4 and it doesn't come close to the others in terms of sharpness, even when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8
In the past I've owned the allegedly superb 24-70mm AF-S f/2.8 and even though that was a £1200 lens, it was absolutely trounced by all three of the primes I've mentioned.
budfox said:
I'm a Nikon DSLR man (who used to work in TV post production) and I'm yet to find a modern AF-S lens that even gets close to my older AF-D lenses for sharpness.
At present I use a 15 year old 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, along with prime 24mm, 35mm and 85mm AF-D lenses. The one AF-S lens I own is a 50mm f/1.4 and it doesn't come close to the others in terms of sharpness, even when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8
In the past I've owned the allegedly superb 24-70mm AF-S f/2.8 and even though that was a £1200 lens, it was absolutely trounced by all three of the primes I've mentioned.
Interesting comemnts bu not really relevant to the discussion.At present I use a 15 year old 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, along with prime 24mm, 35mm and 85mm AF-D lenses. The one AF-S lens I own is a 50mm f/1.4 and it doesn't come close to the others in terms of sharpness, even when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8
In the past I've owned the allegedly superb 24-70mm AF-S f/2.8 and even though that was a £1200 lens, it was absolutely trounced by all three of the primes I've mentioned.
If you're shooting jpeg there really isn't any need to sharpen your images further as its already been taken care of 'in camera'.
RAW files are different as they are inherently not sharp by nature and will always require sharpening of some sort.
Selective sharpening (using layer mask), is also a good option as you can sharpen individual areas rather than the whole image. eg; if you have an out of focus background why sharpen it? Just sharpen the person / area you've focused on?
As well as using the standard Unsharp Filter or smart filter in PS, I find the Highpass filter / sharpening method also offers an really nice way of sharpening images
RAW files are different as they are inherently not sharp by nature and will always require sharpening of some sort.
Selective sharpening (using layer mask), is also a good option as you can sharpen individual areas rather than the whole image. eg; if you have an out of focus background why sharpen it? Just sharpen the person / area you've focused on?
As well as using the standard Unsharp Filter or smart filter in PS, I find the Highpass filter / sharpening method also offers an really nice way of sharpening images
Edited by TheBlondeFella on Wednesday 31st December 09:22
RobDickinson said:
TheBlondeFella said:
If you're shooting jpeg there really isn't any need to sharpen your images further as its already been taken care of 'in camera'.
Depends on the level of sharpening the camera applies and the output still.. What you cant do is remove the sharpeningThe only real reason tho sharpen jpegs is if they are a little soft ...
budfox said:
I'm a Nikon DSLR man (who used to work in TV post production) and I'm yet to find a modern AF-S lens that even gets close to my older AF-D lenses for sharpness.
At present I use a 15 year old 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, along with prime 24mm, 35mm and 85mm AF-D lenses. The one AF-S lens I own is a 50mm f/1.4 and it doesn't come close to the others in terms of sharpness, even when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8
In the past I've owned the allegedly superb 24-70mm AF-S f/2.8 and even though that was a £1200 lens, it was absolutely trounced by all three of the primes I've mentioned.
Againt not relevant to this discussion but I own a mk1 nikkor 80-200 2.8 (complete with dented filter ring) and it's by far the sharpest lens I've ever used. Might have to go shopping for the 35.At present I use a 15 year old 80-200 AF-D f/2.8, along with prime 24mm, 35mm and 85mm AF-D lenses. The one AF-S lens I own is a 50mm f/1.4 and it doesn't come close to the others in terms of sharpness, even when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8
In the past I've owned the allegedly superb 24-70mm AF-S f/2.8 and even though that was a £1200 lens, it was absolutely trounced by all three of the primes I've mentioned.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff