Good Sharpening

[bob carnie]

Bob, why do I have to prove a known fact? I said some would say it's not relevant, and obviously it's not relevant in your work. It's safe to say you have a reputation of doing the highest quality work and deserve that reputation.
OK?
Tyler

You do not have to prove anything to me Tyler.. I was just curious as your findings do not match my findings in regard to LAB

[bob carnie]

I look at working in LAB very carefully as complete disaster is easily obtained.
Kind of like putting a finishing nail in with a sledgehammer.

I was merely pointing out a few reasons why I am less than 100% comfortable with the vid and it's recommendations, as I implied it's a source of ideas that can be looked into elsewhere, as others have also suggested. It rather casually brings up issues about spaces that require more than entry level use, CMYK as well as LAB. Bob himself just said the use of LAB is best done with knowledge and finesse, and he is clearly experienced with it.
Tyler

[bob carnie]

I think a lot of the controversy about LAB space is due to Dans videos where he works on really atrocious images and in all cases makes images that can only be
defined as Kitch , over sharpened and over saturated colour

but I spent four sessions with the man.. each session three days 12 hours long and what he has forgotten about PS I wish I knew.

I am a huge fan of the space and as Tyler correctly points out it works for me and one must be very careful when working in the space.
I was turned onto LAB right here on Large Format with threads by Chris Jordan who brought out controlling colour changes without affecting the neutrals.. this is one of the most powerful tools within LAB, and I was intriqued and followed the wormhole.( his reference at the time was getting rid of blue shadows on concrete in the open shade areas)

Most people relate to LAB about sharpening on the L , but once again as Tyler pointed out it is easily achieved in RGB on the luminosity mode.
Another area where I use it a lot is in BW conversion, where I will twist the AB channels to separate complimentary colours or better yet move them farther apart from each other on a layer paint in the effect from each other then immediately go to RGB and channel blend to make the best possible conversion.

I for one didn't know there was any controversy about LAB space, so I am grateful it has been mentioned and explained a bit.

There's always something to learn here, that's for sure.

[Tyler Boley]

This further makes me take the vid with some distance, there very very little reason for anyone these days to be converting to CMYK. Unless you are handing off your files for prepess work, and have the press guy's specific recommendation for WHICH cmyk to convert to... and know what to look for in that conversion process and specific cmyk optimization after the conversion.. it's completely irrelevant in today's digital work for the vast majority of digital workers.

Wow , we must be on different wavelengths.. much of the last two years my beta testing has been on making negative separations using PS.. RGB and Lab would be the last place I would work from.
CMYK is totally the place to do it.

Using RGB, CMYK and yes even LAB is totally relevant to alt printmaking.

But then again I never considered myself in the vast majority of digital workers.

man this stuff gets difficult sometimes, did I do something to piss you off?. I don't know what you are doing on CMYK or why you work there, I'm sure you have your reasons and they are good. Negative separations are a completely different issue than what more are doing here and I can imagine CMYK would be relevant. In general though, cmyk is an OUTPUT device profile, not a working space. In fact most people don't realize this, they think there is "a" CMYK space just like there are RGB spaces not knowing there are many CMYK profiles, each related to SPECIFIC press and paper conditions, and which they are converting to is determined in color settings most never look into. Which is selected, either by default or by user choice, will determine gamut, black channel build and limit, individual ink tints and limits, dot gain of each, total ink limit, etc etc. I convert to cmyk occasionally because I have a RIP and some CMYK ink/paper setups, and that way I can control the individual ink channels directly. All the previously mentioned issues are determined by me when I make the RIP setup for the paper and ink, and the build the profile. All this is off topic, again, I'm simply suggesting anyone interested in the kind of USM techniques suggested in the vid, look into it a bit more. Please.
Tyler

[patrickjames]

In the sharpening video the author states he is sharpening for print, as in printing press. That is a big difference than sharpening for inkjet. I thought the distinction should be stated because of some of the negativity above.

I edit color in LAB mode for scans. It took quite a while to learn, but I saw the advantages of it after I started doing it. It is not easy to wrap your head around though. It requires a different way of thinking about color. I imagine color now as a big 3 dimensional ball of muliti-colored play doh. The result, for me, is control of color I was never able to achieve before I started doing it. I agree with what Bob stated above. It is easy to make a mess out of it if you don't know what you are doing. I almost gave up at one point. I like the advantages though.

In the end, do whatever works for you. In this day and age, there really aren't any "better" ways, there are just different ways. Technology has afforded us that.

[bob carnie]

Tyler

no you have done nothing to piss me off, I think we have differing markets and our methods of getting to a final print may be vastly different, but obviously effective.

I am just now these past 5 years seeing the potential of CMYK for alternative printing, I hope some day to be a service provider of negatives for those who find it intimidating to make large
silver negatives for many if not all of the printing processes that require a darkroom.

I have very limited knowledge of the PRESS world as 100% of my work is dedicated to prints for hanging on walls, whether it be silver, pigment or ink prints.
I do not use CMYK for any reason other than making negs for pigment or alt prints and I must say this old dog is learning new tricks each day.
The combination of RGB and LAB is my world and for me it is second nature. Anyone who has printed on a colour enlarger will pick up LAB much faster than RGB in regards
to the info palette.
In fact I have the digital colour meter found on the Mac set to Lab and use it every day to take readings.... L channel 10 zones 100 points... 0 A or B means neutral way more easier to read than the RGB numbers.

I do use the L channel to sharpen if its a colour image which is appropriate to the OP's question
I also use Sandy's method for landscape work where there is a lot of flat surfaces
I use high amount low radius for sharp lines .
Most time I am painting in two different sharpenings depending on the subject.

I never, and I mean never use a plug in and for those who do , your heard it here,.. Using plugins is dumbing you down...

now I have pissed off a bunch of people and will take some heat.

Bob

[Tyler Boley]

HAH! I agree about plugins..
I don't do pre press either, all fine art prints here... that was just info on CMYK use. Things have become even more challenging here.. now it's CMYKOG!
Thanks Bob

[Ari]

In the sharpening video the author states he is sharpening for print, as in printing press. That is a big difference than sharpening for inkjet. I thought the distinction should be stated because of some of the negativity above.

That's what I wanted to say, thank you, Patrick.
The author seems to come from a printing background, he alludes to it once or twice.
Much of the vitriol here could have been avoided.