Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Thanks
Joe
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:27:05 -0000, "Joe Smith" wrote:
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon
40D.
Thanks
Joe
If one was better than the other, there would have been only one.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.Better camera, lens, or eyepiece optical adjustment attachment ? Steadier hand. More mega pixels, tripod, deeper depth of field, the list goes on LONG before you even think of using PS to fix a photo. —
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Thanks
Joe
"Joe Smith" wrote:
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Me? I never use neither hardware nor software sharpen the whole image. Once awhile I may add little sharpen around the eyes and that’s about it.
And for your question, pick your choice
– You can set Sharpen Level’s in 40D setting (I don’t use to know where)
– You can apply sharpen with either RAW converter or Photoshop.
Joel wrote:
"Joe Smith" wrote:
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Me? I never use neither hardware nor software sharpen the whole image. Once awhile I may add little sharpen around the eyes and that’s about it.
And for your question, pick your choice
– You can set Sharpen Level’s in 40D setting (I don’t use to know where)
That is only useful if you shoot in JPEG, though. If you shoot in RAW, the sharpening setting in the camera is irrelevant.
– You can apply sharpen with either RAW converter or Photoshop.
If you shoot in RAW, you *must* sharpen in either the RAW converter or in Photoshop. RAW images are always a little soft because of the low pass filter of the camera. No camera setting can change that.
To answer the question: Unsharp Mask is as old as Photoshop itself, Smart Sharpen is a newer and better method. Learn how to use Smart Sharpen and you will get better results.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.Smartsharpen is a "smarter tool" , but can sometimes be a little difficult. Unsharp Mask is the
Thanks
Joe
"Joe Smith" wrote:You seem to be suggesting that , as long as you buy the right hardware, you will never need Photoshop.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Me? I never use neither hardware nor software sharpen the whole image. Once awhile I may add little sharpen around the eyes and that’s about it.
And for your question, pick your choice
– You can set Sharpen Level’s in 40D setting (I don’t use to know where)
– You can apply sharpen with either RAW converter or Photoshop.
And *if* you can see the difference then use the one gives you the best result.
My advice is using good lens, try to capture the sharp image then don’t need to worry about sharpen. If you use cheapie lens then you may not like the result of the reapired image.
– Don’t waste money on cheap lens, most of them won’t worth the trouble.
– Save money by not spending on cheapie lens to buy a top_of_the_line lens to enjoy the memory. And to spend the valuable time working on improving post processing instead of wasting time fixing poor damaged image that won’t make you happy.
Thanks
Joe
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Thanks
Joe
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:08:24 -0600, Joel wrote:
"Joe Smith" wrote:You seem to be suggesting that , as long as you buy the right hardware, you will never need Photoshop.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Me? I never use neither hardware nor software sharpen the whole image. Once awhile I may add little sharpen around the eyes and that’s about it.
And for your question, pick your choice
– You can set Sharpen Level’s in 40D setting (I don’t use to know where)
– You can apply sharpen with either RAW converter or Photoshop.
And *if* you can see the difference then use the one gives you the best result.
My advice is using good lens, try to capture the sharp image then don’t need to worry about sharpen. If you use cheapie lens then you may not like the result of the reapired image.
– Don’t waste money on cheap lens, most of them won’t worth the trouble.
– Save money by not spending on cheapie lens to buy a top_of_the_line lens to enjoy the memory. And to spend the valuable time working on improving post processing instead of wasting time fixing poor damaged image that won’t make you happy.
Thanks
Joe
Sharpening filters are not there to correct the problems of a cheap or out of focus lens, although many people try to do that, almost always with poor results.
I have often used some of the best lenses available on the best bodies available, I will still use a
sharpening filter , or any other Photoshop tool , to get the image the way I want it. That is why Photoshop exists. That is why so many photographers buy it and use it regularly.
The OP wants to get his images looking the way that he wants them to look. Sharpening filters may well be a part of that. To suggest that anyone that uses a sharpening filter, either has the wrong equipment or poor technique is just wrong.
Your last sentence is nonsensical.
The OP wants to get his images looking the way that he wants them to look. Sharpening filters may well be a part of that. To suggest that anyone that uses a sharpening filter, either has the wrong equipment or poor technique is just wrong.PS can only fix the result. It can’t touch the original. Which means he’ll NEVER have it in focus, and any sub sequent copies made won’t match anything that came before it, if he relies on PS to fix all the pre-mistakes that lead up to the fuzzy original.
Your last sentence is nonsensical.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Without all the flaming of the followup posts, the answer to your question depends on what you want to do and how much time you wish to invest in learning.
Smart sharpen is a good way for a person with little technical skill to get images which look sharper. It’s easy, it’s fast, you don’t need to learn very much.
Unsharp Mask is more powerful. You have more control over precisely how the sharpening is done. Getting good results, though, requires an investment of brain power; it really, really helps to understand what it does and how it works, and the basic ideas behind it.
For starters, neither Smart Sharpen nor Unsharp Mask is capable of taking an image blurred by poor focus and generating detail not capured in the original. The best way to get high-quality output is to start from high-quality input; if your pictures are soft because your hands are shaking or because you’re not in focus when you take the picture, nothing can help you very much.
The various sharpening tools in Photoshop increase the apparent perception of sharpness by enhancing contrast along edges. They differ in how this is done.
Unsharp Mask mimics an old-scool, non-digital technique of the same name that is done by exposing the negative through a positive and slightly blurry version of the original image, the "un-sharp mask." The un-sharp mask is usually a plate of glass with photo emulsion on it, which is contact-printed from the negative either from the opposite side of the glass or through a spacer so that the positive is a bit out of focus.
The purpose of doing this is that when you project a negative through a blurry positive, the positive mutes the negative, reducing its contrast, except along the blurred edges. Light areas of the negative (which correspond to dark areas of the positive) become lighter; dark areas of the negative (which correspond to light areas of the positive) become darker. This results in localized increase in contrast along edges.
The Photoshop unsharp mask offers very fine control over sharpening, but its use requires some knowledge. Unsharp masking is part art, part science; the "best" settings depend on many factors, including the amount of noise in the image, the size and resolution at which the image will be viewed or printed, and the content of the image.
Generally speaking, the Threshold setting is used to control how much different in value two pixels need to be before they are considered an "edge." Noisy images benefit from higher Threshold settings; smooth images from lower Threshold settings.
The Radius controls the width of the effect along edges. High Radius means that the localized areas of increased contrast are wider; low Radius makes them narrower. If you are sharpening for print, this is often set to the print resolution of the image divided by 200 (for example, 1.5 for a 300 pixel per inch image)–assuming you’re printing with a halftone on press and the image resolution is twice the frequency of the halftone you’re using. Home users generally aren’t working for press, so you can safely ignore all that; for printing on a home inkjet printer I’ll usually use about 2 for the Radius,a nd for screen I usually use 1.
The Amount is the total amount of localized increase in contrast; this will vary according to the specifics of the image. If you’re sharpening for print, the image should generally look just a bit over-sharpened on screen.
In article ,
"Joe Smith" wrote:
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon
40D.
Without all the flaming of the followup posts, the answer to your question depends on what you want to do and how much time you wish to invest in learning.
Smart sharpen is a good way for a person with little technical skill to get images which look sharper. It’s easy, it’s fast, you don’t need to learn very much.
Unsharp Mask is more powerful. You have more control over precisely how the sharpening is done. Getting good results, though, requires an investment of brain power; it really, really helps to understand what it does and how it works, and the basic ideas behind it.
For starters, neither Smart Sharpen nor Unsharp Mask is capable of taking an image blurred by poor focus and generating detail not capured in the original. The best way to get high-quality output is to start from high-quality input; if your pictures are soft because your hands are shaking or because you’re not in focus when you take the picture, nothing can help you very much.
The various sharpening tools in Photoshop increase the apparent perception of sharpness by enhancing contrast along edges. They differ in how this is done.
Unsharp Mask mimics an old-scool, non-digital technique of the same name that is done by exposing the negative through a positive and slightly blurry version of the original image, the "un-sharp mask." The un-sharp mask is usually a plate of glass with photo emulsion on it, which is contact-printed from the negative either from the opposite side of the glass or through a spacer so that the positive is a bit out of focus.
The purpose of doing this is that when you project a negative through a blurry positive, the positive mutes the negative, reducing its contrast, except along the blurred edges. Light areas of the negative (which correspond to dark areas of the positive) become lighter; dark areas of the negative (which correspond to light areas of the positive) become darker. This results in localized increase in contrast along edges.
The Photoshop unsharp mask offers very fine control over sharpening, but its use requires some knowledge. Unsharp masking is part art, part science; the "best" settings depend on many factors, including the amount of noise in the image, the size and resolution at which the image will be viewed or printed, and the content of the image.
Generally speaking, the Threshold setting is used to control how much different in value two pixels need to be before they are considered an "edge." Noisy images benefit from higher Threshold settings; smooth images from lower Threshold settings.
The Radius controls the width of the effect along edges. High Radius means that the localized areas of increased contrast are wider; low Radius makes them narrower. If you are sharpening for print, this is often set to the print resolution of the image divided by 200 (for example, 1.5 for a 300 pixel per inch image)–assuming you’re printing with a halftone on press and the image resolution is twice the frequency of the halftone you’re using. Home users generally aren’t working for press, so you can safely ignore all that; for printing on a home inkjet printer I’ll usually use about 2 for the Radius,a nd for screen I usually use 1.
The Amount is the total amount of localized increase in contrast; this will vary according to the specifics of the image. If you’re sharpening for print, the image should generally look just a bit over-sharpened on screen.
—
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
In article ,
"Joe Smith" wrote:
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon
40D.
Without all the flaming of the followup posts, the answer to your question depends on what you want to do and how much time you wish to invest in learning.
Smart sharpen is a good way for a person with little technical skill to get images which look sharper. It’s easy, it’s fast, you don’t need to learn very much.
Unsharp Mask is more powerful. You have more control over precisely how the sharpening is done. Getting good results, though, requires an investment of brain power; it really, really helps to understand what it does and how it works, and the basic ideas behind it.
For starters, neither Smart Sharpen nor Unsharp Mask is capable of taking an image blurred by poor focus and generating detail not capured in the original. The best way to get high-quality output is to start from high-quality input; if your pictures are soft because your hands are shaking or because you’re not in focus when you take the picture, nothing can help you very much.
The various sharpening tools in Photoshop increase the apparent perception of sharpness by enhancing contrast along edges. They differ in how this is done.
Unsharp Mask mimics an old-scool, non-digital technique of the same name that is done by exposing the negative through a positive and slightly blurry version of the original image, the "un-sharp mask." The un-sharp mask is usually a plate of glass with photo emulsion on it, which is contact-printed from the negative either from the opposite side of the glass or through a spacer so that the positive is a bit out of focus.
The purpose of doing this is that when you project a negative through a blurry positive, the positive mutes the negative, reducing its contrast, except along the blurred edges. Light areas of the negative (which correspond to dark areas of the positive) become lighter; dark areas of the negative (which correspond to light areas of the positive) become darker. This results in localized increase in contrast along edges.
The Photoshop unsharp mask offers very fine control over sharpening, but its use requires some knowledge. Unsharp masking is part art, part science; the "best" settings depend on many factors, including the amount of noise in the image, the size and resolution at which the image will be viewed or printed, and the content of the image.
Generally speaking, the Threshold setting is used to control how much different in value two pixels need to be before they are considered an "edge." Noisy images benefit from higher Threshold settings; smooth images from lower Threshold settings.
The Radius controls the width of the effect along edges. High Radius means that the localized areas of increased contrast are wider; low Radius makes them narrower. If you are sharpening for print, this is often set to the print resolution of the image divided by 200 (for example, 1.5 for a 300 pixel per inch image)–assuming you’re printing with a halftone on press and the image resolution is twice the frequency of the halftone you’re using. Home users generally aren’t working for press, so you can safely ignore all that; for printing on a home inkjet printer I’ll usually use about 2 for the Radius,a nd for screen I usually use 1.
The Amount is the total amount of localized increase in contrast; this will vary according to the specifics of the image. If you’re sharpening for print, the image should generally look just a bit over-sharpened on screen.
Which should I be using for sharpening photo’s captured in Raw from a Canon 40D.
Thanks
Joe
Never sharpen an original image>> NEVER..Always sharpen on a new layer (not the background)
Only sharpen the very last on a duplicate for specific printing job.Print sharpening for output device should be the last thing you do (after resizing to requirements)
Sharpening is changin pixels and is destructive photoshoping.however sharpening for source (camera and scanner blur) and for content (eg eyes, contour lines etc) if you read Bruce Frasers book I refer to above should be done as a seperate step. I specialise in fine art black and white prints so my workflow is:
*** the only time I sharpen the original is on a seprate layer in photoshop and when it’s with the sharpening tool to glitter earings, medals and eye shine.
To answer the question: Unsharp Mask is as old as Photoshop itself, Smart Sharpen is a newer and better method. Learn how to use Smart Sharpen and you will get better results.Maybe you could write a little tutorial on smart sharpen and put it on your website. I found your other photoshop tutorials there quite useful and would quite appreciate your view on how to use smart sharpen properly.
Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
