[Only registered members may post.] [Threaded View] [Translate]
Sharpness Argus Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 5038 W: 260 N: 15594] (50626)::2012-02-03 6:56
There seems to be a certain sharpness mania on TN. The eagerness to present an image with top sharpness of the subject using the present technology of image treatment programs emphases whites to reach the sharpness to acheive sharpness. This has led to soft hairs and feathers looking like they are made of metal.
I try to avoid or reduce this by using the lasso tool to avoid increasing sharpness where there are white or light areas or where feathers and hairs risk being made to look like small files or needles.
Maybe this is something to think about!
Re: Sharpness mwmod99 Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 855 W: 655 N: 3361] (14196)::2012-02-03 11:47
I think you are absolutely right Ivan ...an over sharpened image looks even more amateurish to me than an image with moderate softness if I can say it that way!... it is obvious as well that over sharpening an image with low resolution will result in disaster. Many people here also can hardly separate the softness from the out of focus issue. A small bird for example with very fine texture of the plumage can look horrible when over sharpened, so I good idea is to apply some gentle sharpening selectively....for example around the eyes etc. Using the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop can be tricky often. In my personal experience I am using relatively large Amounts, very small radius, like 0.2 pixels and Threshold of 1 or even 0. ( That is a suggestion for an image not larger than 800x800 pixels and 72dpi resolution)
Re: Sharpness drchoneydew Gold Star Critiquer/Silver Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 162 W: 38 N: 475] (3501)::2012-02-03 16:34
I understand what you're saying, all except the lasso and photoshop chat as i don't use this app, use free;Gimp. Now i have another thing to investigate! Thanks so much!
Re: Sharpness pirate Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 799 W: 152 N: 1186] (7474)::2012-02-04 2:38
Fully agree on that topic
@ George: what would be your suggestion on original file for unsharp mask
I am using up to 300%, 0,3 pixel radius, Threshold 0,5 on original and after downsizing again but maximum 50 %
what would be your suggestion?
Tom
Re: Sharpness mwmod99 Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 855 W: 655 N: 3361] (14196)::2012-02-04 3:29
Hi Tom,
obviously anyone can have it's own preferences, but actually I applied your suggestion values to one of my RAW images, when converted to the required 800pixel size. In my opinion the radius plays some critical role with this limited physical size. Well the jump from Radius 0.2 to 0.3 doesn't look dramatic, but I already can see some traces of this terrible thin white strips around the corners of the areas where fine detail meets some out of focus places ...if you know what I mean Tom?!! ( Obviously I am Keeping the Threshold at your suggested 0.5, and amount of +/- 300.) ...so, in my opinion your suggestion can work better with images as large as 1600pixels, but then the Amount value have to be reduced even further bellow 150% to avoid the above unwanted results...well ...I think ;)))
Re: Sharpness pirate Gold Star Critiquer/Gold Star Workshop Editor/Gold Note Writer [C: 799 W: 152 N: 1186] (7474)::2012-02-04 7:23
Hi George
yep I agree 300 % is only to be used if you downsize after sharpening, the artifacts will all disappear when e.g. downsized to 800 pixels for TN
have a great WE
Tom