sharpening high resolution film scans

[EH21]

Now that I have the luxury of working with very good scans of my film images, I'm encountering a new problem. Most of the newer sharpening routines such as the detail group in LR are not working well with these high resolution scans - they just pronounce the grain or do weird things to the grain, but not sharpen the parts of the image I want. I feel like I need to go back to old PS techniques like find edges, or frequency separation to do the image justice. I wish I could take advantage of the newer software such as inside LR or C1 that recover some loses due to diffraction or shake but unfortunately the results are all that pleasing. I'm curious to know what others here are doing with their high resolution scans?

[Pere Casals]

Hello,

A very good sharpening job (IMHO) may require sometimes the local application of the sharpening filters. In a portrait we may want a different sharpening strategy for eyes that for a cheek. Not wanting to be intrussive aganist the image with PS, but local application may have a lot of sense. This requires working with masks and layers.

Sometimes we adjust sharpening with a few clicks, and LR is enough for it, sometimes we may want a certain refined job and Ps is the right tool.

There is another important thing: resizing algorithm, in the Ps image size dialog (at bottom) you select the algorithm, "bicubic ideal for reductions" is not the default one, but the interesting one, for pixel level acutance.

Regards

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I use mid-tone sharpening unsharp mask. I can paint out the areas I don't want sharpened oe want a different sharpening or sharpening technique. I love layer masks and paint on them.

[Peter De Smidt]

One way is to use high radius low amount unsharp masking. This increases mid-tone contrast, including macro details, without going nut's on really fine detail. I do also use high pass sharpening quite a bit. There are fancier ways, but I've found that the better my original, the less I need sharpening, and over-sharpening is way worse than undersharpening.

[williaty]

I have not tried it in your specific use case, but you might want to try a the high-pass sharpening technique. Duplicate the layer (or make stamp visible layer if you have a stack of layers). De-saturate the new layer. Set the blending mode to Soft Light. Convert the layer to a Smart Object (this allows you to change your radius on High Pass to see what works best). Apply the High Pass filter (Filters>Other>High Pass). You probably want to pick a larger radius on a high-resolution scan to ensure that it gets to the point of sharpening image detail (which covers many pixels). Create a layer mask and set it to all black (so the high pass sharpening is not applied anywhere in the image). Then use the paint brush to paint white into the layer mask where you want sharpening applied (say, paint the mask white over the eyes but leave the mask black over the out-of-focus background areas). Once happy, Rasterize the layer to save space and processing overhead before saving the file.

[David Lobato]

Try doing noise reduction before sharpening. In photoshop use the Camera Raw Filter up on the menu. Zoom to 100% and observe the effects of grain while slowly adding luminance noise reduction. Then still at 100% do the sharpening on the magnified image. Observe the effects on the image while sharpening is added. Adjust both the Amount and the Radius in sharpening.You may need to go back to re-adjust the noise reduction. You will learn a balancing act to get the best of noise reduction and sharpening working together.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I have not tried it in your specific use case, but you might want to try a the high-pass sharpening technique. Duplicate the layer (or make stamp visible layer if you have a stack of layers). De-saturate the new layer. Set the blending mode to Soft Light. Convert the layer to a Smart Object (this allows you to change your radius on High Pass to see what works best). Apply the High Pass filter (Filters>Other>High Pass). You probably want to pick a larger radius on a high-resolution scan to ensure that it gets to the point of sharpening image detail (which covers many pixels). Create a layer mask and set it to all black (so the high pass sharpening is not applied anywhere in the image). Then use the paint brush to paint white into the layer mask where you want sharpening applied (say, paint the mask white over the eyes but leave the mask black over the out-of-focus background areas). Once happy, Rasterize the layer to save space and processing overhead before saving the file.

This is a bit more detailed than I do for high pass. I generally make a duplicate layer, then choose soft light or overlay, etc. Choose high pass apply the radius and observe the effect. I have also found it takes a lot more radius to effect a sharpening than for a true digital file. I am gonna try this method of sharpening.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

One way is to use high radius low amount unsharp masking. This increases mid-tone contrast, including macro details, without going nut's on really fine detail. I do also use high pass sharpening quite a bit. There are fancier ways, but I've found that the better my original, the less I need sharpening, and over-sharpening is way worse than undersharpening.

Agree too much sharpening makes the image look, well, like a horror show.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

Try doing noise reduction before sharpening. In photoshop use the Camera Raw Filter up on the menu. Zoom to 100% and observe the effects of grain while slowly adding luminance noise reduction. Then still at 100% do the sharpening on the magnified image. Observe the effects on the image while sharpening is added. Adjust both the Amount and the Radius in sharpening.You may need to go back to re-adjust the noise reduction. You will learn a balancing act to get the best of noise reduction and sharpening working together.

Interesting. I generally try to avoid noise reduction if possible.

[EH21]

Hi All,
Thanks for all the tips. I have also heard from others via e-mail that they don't sharpen their film scans at all. I'm not using the sharpening in the scanner software so feel I do need to sharpen somewhat, particularly for larger prints.

Here's a summary of what I've tried so far:
LR - with and without noise reduction - the settings have to be so low - about 35 sharpening, and threshold about 25 or higher to avoid sharpening the grain too much. I still think this filter works better with lower res images.
PS - smart sharpen, and unsharp mask
Topaz InFocus - this was very gentle and using low settings some detail is coaxed out but not really enough - higher settings and the image became overly crunchy.

The best results from a simple plugin/filter so far seem to come from the new photoshop cc filter - Shake Reduction
But I think my best results have come from using the graphic equalizer/frequency separation technique where I apply the high pass on duplicate layers using scaled radius settings - these layers then set to linear light blend mode. I just vary the opacity of each layer and this could be painted in selectively too.

I haven't tried the old school method of finding edges yet or the new diffraction recovery tool in C1 yet, but plan to do so.
My guess is there might be some scientific tools in ImageJ that work on fourier tranforms that can side step the noise, but I only know a tiny bit about that stuff, however I've seen some magic done with it.

I'm not really wanting to reduce the grain so much as pull the image out of the grain if that makes sense.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

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.

[Pere Casals]

I have also heard from others via e-mail that they don't sharpen their film scans at all.

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/2017/05/01/16000-photo-scanner-vs-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.




I'm not using the sharpening in the scanner software

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.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

How about creating contrast mask, that might help with edges and such. Or not. Haven't played with it too much yet.

[ventdesable]

Now that I have the luxury of working with very good scans of my film images, I'm encountering a new problem. Most of the newer sharpening routines such as the detail group in LR are not working well with these high resolution scans - they just pronounce the grain or do weird things to the grain, but not sharpen the parts of the image I want. I feel like I need to go back to old PS techniques like find edges, or frequency separation to do the image justice. I wish I could take advantage of the newer software such as inside LR or C1 that recover some loses due to diffraction or shake but unfortunately the results are all that pleasing. I'm curious to know what others here are doing with their high resolution scans?

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 (https://www.amazon.com/World-Sharpening-Photoshop-Camera-Lightroom-ebook/dp/B002NQSMWW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1524952446&sr=8-1&keywords=fraser+schewe) written by Bruce Fraser & Jeff Schewe.

Bonne chance.

Jérôme

[Jac@stafford.net]

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.

[Tin Can]

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.

[Drew Wiley]

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.

[Tin Can]

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.





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.

[Drew Wiley]

Yes, Condit gear is the best. But I often combine masking methods.

[nbagno]

Pixel genius sharpener plugin is now free, they have presets for film

http://www.pixelgenius.com/




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk