It makes sense. Grain is what gives the film its uniqueness. I haven't tried layered approach for applying high pass, but will at some point. Try the Nik sharpening tools if you haven't.
It makes sense. Grain is what gives the film its uniqueness. I haven't tried layered approach for applying high pass, but will at some point. Try the Nik sharpening tools if you haven't.
It depends on the scanner you use, some scanners do make a hidden sharpening in the firmware or in the drivers, and some have a higher resolving power than others.
https://petapixel.com/2017/05/01/160...s-500-scanner/
With Epson V850 (if "in scanner" sharpening disabled) a certain level of Ps sharpening will improve result to a certain point, an scan from a Hasselblad X1/X5 will tolerate a lower sharpening amount, but end results won't be much different with MF and 4x5, if each scan is given the best sharpening policy for it.
With 35mm film there is more difference and a roll film scanner is recommended if you don't want to pay for an X1.
For 8x10 a cheap Epson delivers amazing results, while X1/X5 simply can't scan that size.
This is for BW and color negative film. For Velvia/Provia slides an Epson improves by using Multi-Exposure fature, but for extreme deep shadows with interesting detail a Drum or an X5 is what does the good job.
IMHO using "sharpening in the scanner software" is convenient in some situations, for less important images, and if we plan to spend little effort in the edition. For an important image I also prefer having the scan as raw as possible and working it with Ps.
How about creating contrast mask, that might help with edges and such. Or not. Haven't played with it too much yet.
Hello,
diffraction or shake are to be reduced while you're taking the image. Sharpening is mainly here to help you to recover the losses generated by the "digitalisation".
Do you need to sharpen a scanned image ? Obviously yes. How much ? It depends on your scanner and where you want to get.
You have in fact three types of sharpening. Two of them are mandatory, the last is compulsory.
When you scan a neg or an ekta ; you have to apply a sharpening to compensate for the scanner's imperfections. Always the same ; the weakest link...
Then you can apply local sharpening (creative) to enhance some details (eyes in a portrait) or soften them by opposition. This process is left to your appreciation.
Finally, you will have to apply an "output" sharpening. Nothing "creative" in it. It is linked to the medium you use (screen, print) and a mathematical operation. This is the sharpening you find with printing panel in LR.
The trick is here : when you do a sharpening in LR, it corresponds to a sum of actions in PS. So, theoretically, you could do it almost perfectly in PS but it's going to take a long time relative to the number of operations to be done. Therefore, the question is : Why do I get an ugly result in LR if it is so fantastic ? (and it will be the same in Camera Raw).
My answer is that it is because your aim is far to unobtainable to get it done. Do not misunderstand me. The real difficulty of sharpening is first to know what can be done and second to know what cannot be done. You will not get over shaking blur or recover from diffraction. All that has to be taken in charge before the picture is taken. But, you will emphasize tonal separations and get better micro-contrasts.
In order to understand it, you can try to sharpen a perfect picture (best f stop, rigorous camera holding and static subject). You will see that LR can give you perfect results (you have to go all way down to the print to compare).
Or, because you do not need to believe me on my word, you can get a copy of Real World Image Sharpening written by Bruce Fraser & Jeff Schewe.
Bonne chance.
Jérôme
In my modest experience, when I'm almost done with the hard parts of post-processing I save it then bring the image up to 1:1 at the size it will be printed. That's big!
Then create a new all-layer merged apply Photoshop Filters -> Other -> High Pass (click [√] preview) and gently move the Radius slider right until you get the hint of sharpness that works. Change the layer mode to Overlay and be happy.
I will not bore you all with my thoughts on sharpening, but I find CC Shake Reduction can work a wonder on old prints I did not make.
Restoration, if you please.
You are aware, aren't you, Randy, that professional portrait retouchers once wore hula hoops when using blending pencils, while listening to Chubby Checkers
records.
Of course Drew. If I could wriggle I would insist on Hooping and Penciling.
However, I was just given a lesson in Unsharp Mask with film only, when I picked up his Condit set. My guru shall remain unnamed. Top man.
Several years ago I got the same persons Adams Retouching Machine.
I will use unsharp, but complete retouching is so last century. A true modern artiste leaves his mark.
Yes, Condit gear is the best. But I often combine masking methods.
Pixel genius sharpener plugin is now free, they have presets for film
http://www.pixelgenius.com/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bookmarks