POLL - software sharpening

[Damien_Demolder]

Sharpening is an essential part of digital photography, whether you let the camera do it or whether you take control yourself in software after the event.

If you do apply the sharpening yourself, do you feel you really know what you are doing? It can be quite complicated, especially if you use the three-slider Unsharp Mask tool. Do you sometimes add too much, or maybe not enough, and do you really understand what those sliders do?

Let us know, so we know whether to feature sharpening more often in the magazine.

Head to the home page to take part in the vote:

Do you feel confident with software sharpening?

Thanks for playing

damien

[beejaybee]

Do you feel confident with software sharpening?

Yes, but then I took the trouble to read & understand the relevant sections in the essential manual to digital image processing techniques: "The Handbook of Astronomical Image Processing" by Richard Berry & James Burnell.

If you think that unsharp mask is the only, or even the best, sharpening technique, think again ... its capabilities are only just the beginning of a scratch into the possibilities ....

.... local adaptive sharpening
.... wavelet sharpening
.... various deconvolution techniques

[APchris]

It certainly is a minefield and I'm never really sure wht I'm doing with it Would welcome an indepth article on the subject

BTW, I really, really wanted to choose the 4th unlabled option in the poll, but I behaved meself

[RonnieG]

If you think that unsharp mask is the only, or even the best, sharpening technique, think again ... its capabilities are only just the beginning of a scratch into the possibilities ....

.... local adaptive sharpening
.... wavelet sharpening
.... various deconvolution techniques

See...this is where lifes too short!

I feel confident doing it mainly through just looking and checking what I'm doing. The three sliders, with experience, become a little more easily understood.

I must admit i can't be A*sed to go into this or that channel whilst facing east on a Tuesday! etc.

If it's too much...it looks like it's too much.
Slide alternative bars to see effect.

Or am I missing the point/ opportunity here?

Ronnie

[Fire_Monkey]

This is a complete mystery to me, but then I'm only just begining to use Photoshop properly. An article explaining it would be good, and some of the other functions of Photoshop too!

[Terrywoodenpic]

I understand rather more than I will usually put into practice. I rarely use things such as selective sharpening using layers.

Mostly I Just sharpen viewing at 100% and give what is needed to just sharpen enough.
If I get round to using the photograph, I just sharpen again for the size I am going to use. If it is for a forum use that can be quite a lot.

[alanS]

I don't really understand it enough to get it right first time and not just play with the settings until it looks ok to me. I think that this is another thing that's often overdone and that the importance of sharpening is sometimes overstated, for printed shots especially, when they're viewed normally.

Some people can't even see contamination in their shots so spotting how sharp a picture is must be beyond them too.

[OneTen]

I don't understand it and at the moment just use trial and error. My intention is read up on it but haven't got round to it yet. Looking forward to reading this weeks mag that arrived today.

[Roger_Provins]

I don't understand it and at the moment just use trial and error. ....

After lots of the above over time I've come down to using

Amount 200-400%
Radius 3-6
Threshold 3-8

... depending on the individual needs of an image.

I was gratified to see that the AP article recommends much the same ... I managed to work something out myself and got it right!

[OneTen]

Rog, are those figures for an A4/A3 print or for 600 pixels for this forum? Or does it matter? Maybe I should read the articles before I ask!

[beejaybee]

I don't understand it and at the moment just use trial and error. ....

After lots of the above over time I've come down to using

Amount 200-400%
Radius 3-6
Threshold 3-8

... depending on the individual needs of an image.

I was gratified to see that the AP article recommends much the same ... I managed to work something out myself and got it right!

At the end of the day it's getting the result you want that's right.

However I'd venture to suggest that, if using unsharp masking alone, using amount greater than about 150% is asking for highly visible sharpening artifacts and, if you need to use radius greater than about 2.5, your focusing is probably off, or the lens has a fault (possibly decentering).

My "standard" USM settings are amount 100%, radius 2.0, threshold 2. That leaves the image very slightly soft but is IMO far preferable to the artifacts that appear when oversharpening is applied. All the detail is there, and a bit of subtle local adaptive sharpening and/or wavelet sharpening can be applied to finish the image off. If necessary; usually it isn't.

[Roger_Provins]

Rog, are those figures for an A4/A3 print or for 600 pixels for this forum? Or does it matter? Maybe I should read the articles before I ask!

I'm really more interested in the print output and those settings seem okay for that so frankly I make no distinction Partly because when I prepare a photo for the net I resize then use Adobe "Save for Web and Devices" which in itself seems to add an appropriate amount of sharpening. At least I think that what happens and the results usually look okay.

... if you need to use radius greater than about 2.5, your focusing is probably off, or the lens has a fault (possibly decentering).

I made major typos in my first post

Should be 0.3 - 0.6 for Radius not 3 - 6

[TimF]

Using Photoshop's tools was always a turn off for me - way too much hassle. For that reason I jumped on Photo Kit Sharpener several years back, and wouldn't use anything else in PS. I did have a bash at using Lightroom's version - which I understand is based on PK Sharpener - the other day, and was pleasantly surprised.

In-camera sharpening is a no-no for me, basically because I never shoot jpegs.

[Roger_Provins]

Well on your recommendation Tim I've just downloaded and installed Photo Kit Sharpener ... when I've read through the 36 page manual I'll give it a go

[Zou]

I hardly ever sharpen an image. For web use I find it an unecessary step, and I rarely print to be honest. If anyone wants to play with one of my Flickr images and show me what gains could be made, please do.

When I do sharpen, I use a technique with a high pass thingy and gaussian blur. Seems to have some effect, but I mainly use it for local edges (to highlight a small part of the image).

[Roy5051]

I have used Photoshop Unsharp Mask for several years and it does exactly what I want. I use a starting point of Amount 75, Radius 1.5 and Threshold 5 and tweak it from there, depending on the image. Works for me.

[TimF]

Well on your recommendation Tim I've just downloaded and installed Photo Kit Sharpener ... when I've read through the 36 page manual I'll give it a go

I'd better grab me coat and start running then!

[Roger_Provins]

Well on your recommendation Tim I've just downloaded and installed Photo Kit Sharpener ... when I've read through the 36 page manual I'll give it a go

I'd better grab me coat and start running then!

.... you can run but you can't hide ... not with that big red dot

[Carrie]

BTW, I really, really wanted to choose the 4th unlabled option in the poll, but I behaved meself

So did I, but by the time I found this week's poll 8% of respondents hadn't shown so much self-constraint

[TimF]