realspeed
Well-known member
The answer is always work on a copy not the original
Sharpening - Since Steve Brought it up
- Thread starter BarkingBeans Coffee
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I have been trying Focus Magic for several weeks. https://www.focusmagic.com/
So far I like it. It provides a very intuitive graphic interface for both motion and blur sharpening. It also enables sampling areas to fine tune the degree of sharpening and in the case of motion sharpening the direction of motion. I use it with masking.
I was unaware of the PixImperfect action and appreciate the post BarkingBeansCoffee.
So far I like it. It provides a very intuitive graphic interface for both motion and blur sharpening. It also enables sampling areas to fine tune the degree of sharpening and in the case of motion sharpening the direction of motion. I use it with masking.
I was unaware of the PixImperfect action and appreciate the post BarkingBeansCoffee.
I'm with Elsa. Clients/editors have criticized my photos a million ways, "not sharp enough" was never one. When I look at others' photos, my criticism is often "oversharpened/overprocessed." So I never ever sharpen in post.
If you are using LR, and hold Alt/Option and slide the Masking slider, you will see in white where your sharpening is being applied. If you are using the LR slider, you might want to explore this.
My exact workflow.. if I don't like the results from DeNoise I'll back off but most of the time it works well.
MikeInMI
Active member
One of my first steps is to use Texture and Clarity sliders in LRc, which I find tends to crispen up an image enough in many cases. If I need more, I use the LRc sharpening slider. And if I need more after that, I use Topaz Photo AI, which I think is incredible in its ability to sharpen.
TJ McG
New member
I guess I'm the only one who still sharpens the old-fashioned way, with a high pass filter set to linear light as a smart filter. Almost infinitely adjustable and non-destructive.
If you are using this give the action a try that's with my linked video. You can change it to linear light if you like.
I often reduce LR sharpening to 0 click to remove chromatic aberration and then Topaz DeNoise.
... see above
My sharpening routines have changed a lot with the addition of layers in LR Classic.
I'm a believer in three types of sharpening - basic Import sharpening with a light touch as part of rendering a raw file, sharpening the subject (or just part of the subject) as part of Creative Sharpening, and then Output Sharpening which completely depends on sizing the output and the intended use. I don't want sharpening on out of focus areas as it essentially magnifies the noise. What this means is I try to avoid global sharpening. For some images, I find Topaz Photo AI can create sharper images or handle noise more effectively than LR - but I'm still using masks and I finish the image in LRC. That's partly because even if the image is sharpened in Topaz, it needs Output Sharpening and LR does that very well. Output sharpening for a print is very different from sharpening for social media with a much smaller file. Social media can manipulate images based on size required for a specific post, so you need to understand those size needs and process accordingly.
Basic Sharpening using default settings in LR has a higher radius than a generally like. I find the radius is appropriate for portraits of people, but I prefer a smaller radius for wildlife, landscapes and plants. That also means a stronger intensity. The Layer adjustments in LRC use the settings of the basic Detail panel, so if you fail to set those settings correctly, it impacts the use of layer sharpening on a local basis.
I typically use Noise Reduction for my backgrounds and areas that don't need sharpening. On some images I'm also balancing some noise reduction with sharpening the subject. These images often work well in Topaz, but you can have some strange artifacts if you are not careful. In Topaz Photo I am very conscious of what I want the tool to accomplish - denoise, sharpen, upsize, recover detail, etc. Sometimes it takes an extra step into Photoshop to work with layers from different techniques or tools.
In addition to Sharpening and Noise Reduction, I consider Texture and Clarity as pseudo-sharpening tools that are used in a similar manner. Often I am decreasing texture and clarity in conjunction with applying noise reduction, or adding texture or clarity to areas being sharpened.
Hopefully sharpening complements the image. I don't want people to look at an image and think, "Wow, that's sharp!" I want the image to be sharp, but not show the tools I used. So the sharpest area might be the edge of the eye, and with normal viewing it simply gives the subject of the image a sparkle. If the feather detail jumps out too much, I've probably overdone my sharpening or clarity/texture.
I'm a believer in three types of sharpening - basic Import sharpening with a light touch as part of rendering a raw file, sharpening the subject (or just part of the subject) as part of Creative Sharpening, and then Output Sharpening which completely depends on sizing the output and the intended use. I don't want sharpening on out of focus areas as it essentially magnifies the noise. What this means is I try to avoid global sharpening. For some images, I find Topaz Photo AI can create sharper images or handle noise more effectively than LR - but I'm still using masks and I finish the image in LRC. That's partly because even if the image is sharpened in Topaz, it needs Output Sharpening and LR does that very well. Output sharpening for a print is very different from sharpening for social media with a much smaller file. Social media can manipulate images based on size required for a specific post, so you need to understand those size needs and process accordingly.
Basic Sharpening using default settings in LR has a higher radius than a generally like. I find the radius is appropriate for portraits of people, but I prefer a smaller radius for wildlife, landscapes and plants. That also means a stronger intensity. The Layer adjustments in LRC use the settings of the basic Detail panel, so if you fail to set those settings correctly, it impacts the use of layer sharpening on a local basis.
I typically use Noise Reduction for my backgrounds and areas that don't need sharpening. On some images I'm also balancing some noise reduction with sharpening the subject. These images often work well in Topaz, but you can have some strange artifacts if you are not careful. In Topaz Photo I am very conscious of what I want the tool to accomplish - denoise, sharpen, upsize, recover detail, etc. Sometimes it takes an extra step into Photoshop to work with layers from different techniques or tools.
In addition to Sharpening and Noise Reduction, I consider Texture and Clarity as pseudo-sharpening tools that are used in a similar manner. Often I am decreasing texture and clarity in conjunction with applying noise reduction, or adding texture or clarity to areas being sharpened.
Hopefully sharpening complements the image. I don't want people to look at an image and think, "Wow, that's sharp!" I want the image to be sharp, but not show the tools I used. So the sharpest area might be the edge of the eye, and with normal viewing it simply gives the subject of the image a sparkle. If the feather detail jumps out too much, I've probably overdone my sharpening or clarity/texture.
MattOZW
Member
Agree with this, it is all about selective editing: subject, parts of subject, background, overall effect. Hardly ever use global adjustments!
I used 2 high pass filters in affinity photo. Works really well and you have to really push the second filter to over sharpen.
macwalter
Active member
Interesting ideas. For me I have used Topas Denoise with its sharpening algorithms for quite awhile but recently decided to give the latest DXO pure raw a go. I find that for maybe 70% it does a good job, often more than good but there is no way to bring back any lost detail like you can with topaz in PS. I usually use the “soft” setting. It is also a real time saver in those cases where it works as desired. Often for noisier images I still use Topaz as I can isolate areas to bring out more detail. I find all the Denoise programs have problems with fine feather detail. DXo pure raw denoises and sharpens at the same time. I find it is often enough but sometimes will brush in more in LR later in the process on specific areas. I have never loved PS sharpening tools but to be fair it could be me not really understanding their best use.
MattOZW
Member
At the end of the day you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Topaz and all the others are fine if you have a good photo for adding a small amount of je ne sais quoi to an image. With Topaz you can pull back the effects or apply them selectively, for example a bird in flight with blurred wings should only have the eyes and head sharpened, if you try to do the blurred wings it just looks crap.
macwalter
Active member
I think this issue will have each of us setting our own standards for what we will tolerate. I tend to be pretty anal pixel peep but that being said, I like action and interesting behavior and if I get a shot that is close, maybe 80% or even less in some cases but great action I will give it a go using any tool I have in post. I don’t enter contests or care much about what is “acceptable “ due to traditional standards etc. also I don’t have exotic glass so sometimes I have to compromise a bit but as I said before I’m pretty picky about sharpness. I like what I use in most cases and sometimes a shot will seem fine only to be tossed out in post. I’m well aware that you can’t make a soft shot sharp at least not by much although every so often I find a can get acceptable results sharpening a specific body part with Topaz sharpen but usually it doe work very well.
The size range of the dot where something that is supposed to look like a point starts to look like a blur, aka the circle of confusion, changes depending on the viewing distance and the visual acuity of the viewer. So to say something is sharp depends. A billboard viewed across the highway looks sharp, but up close blurry. So one would have to approximate the intended viewing distance when judging sharpness.
Article on that topic, no screenshots though. You can get the full program for free 30 day trial, use your own images to check it out.
Contrast - Sharpness - TuTo DxO
In DxO PhotoLab it is the contrast corrections, micro contrast and fine contrast, that act on the impression of sharpness.
tutodxo.com
An additional option in photoshop is to convert a layer to smart object, then the sharpening filter can be woken up to change anytime.
Last edited:
MattOZW
Member
I like to keep it as simple as possible.
1. Select best images after import in LR ( of several hundred after a morning shooting birds at 20fps!
2. Export 3 or 4 into Topaz
3. Crop in Topaz and see how it assesses amount of sharpening required.
4. If very blurry or needs significant upsizing discard the image
5. Check results of auto sharpening and reduce if necessary
6. Allow denoising if required
7. Save back into LR and apply any selective adjustments as necessary
Actually doesn't look that simple once I have written it down, but it is a routine that I am happy with!
I agree with this in general, but it is amazing how much you can recover with AI based tools today. Discards from 5 years ago are usable for many purposes today. Likewise images with too much noise or scans with lots of grain can be processed pretty well today.
macwalter
Active member
I tend to agree to a point at least especially in terms of noise. Out of focus shots however are more often than not out of focus no matter what but maybe there are mitigating circumstances that make the shot worthwhile. The new programs are amazing.