How do you sharpen?

[Mike Anderson]

Awhile ago I read that Photoshop's Smart Sharpen was the best sharpener that came with CS3 (there are 5 or so ways to sharpen with CS3), so I've always used Smart Sharpen and haven't done much experimenting. I recently saw a reference to a book about sharpening (a whole book!), so I realize there's more to sharpening than I was aware.

Basically what I'm doing now (in a film scanning workflow) is
1) NOT sharpening during scanning
2) sharpen only once after final resize with a pixel setting about 1/100 inch of print size.

Is this a decent sharpening practice?

I'm curious how other people sharpen, the workflow and sharpening software, and how worthwhile dedicated sharpening software is given I already have Photoshop.

...Mike

[Ed Richards]

After scanning, I sharpen in PS at 100% view until I am just below the point where I get sharpening artifacts. If I want to boost local (micro) contrast, I do that first. Typical values for an 1800 dpi scan of 4x5 - 90 megs, grey scale, 16 bit - is 150% and 1.5 radius, with 2 threshold if there is blank sky that I want to minimize grain in, using TMY-2. A local contrast boost would be 20% at 40 radius, 0 threshold, then apply the sharpening. (All USM). Then I use Quimage to do final sharpening and rescaling based on print size. This means that I do not have to have different versions of my files for different print sizes.

[Shen45]

A file or a wet and dry stone.

[Ari]

I use the Unsharp Mask and it's usually set to 100%, radius from 1 to 1,5 and a threshold of zero. You can adjust those three variables until you get what you like.

[Walter Calahan]

All scanners add a softness I was taught, so I do a little unsharp mask during the scan. Then any additional unsharp masking is done as the final step in file preparation. Any correction is performed at 100% magnification.

[Mark Stahlke]

The book you're thinking of is Real World Image Sharpening (http://www.amazon.com/World-Sharpening-Photoshop-Camera-Lightroom/dp/0321637550/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269314658&sr=1-1). It's well worth the price of admission.

And the answer to your question is "No, that's not a decent sharpening practice." Read the book and you'll understand why.

[Preston]

Here's my procedure for sharpening for color prints...

First, I do little sharpening in my scan. I then open the image in Photo Shop CS2.

I sharpen for print using the lightness channel in LAB color. As I understand it, if you sharpen in the lightness channel you do not run the risk of affecting color. Here's the procedure...

Using LAB Color and Lightness Channel in Photo Shop for Sharpening for Print:
1. Open you image in Photo Shop and size for the print size you want.
2. Flatten the image, if needed, by choosing Layer>Flatten
3. Next, go to Image>Mode and select Lab Color
4. Create a copy of the background layer by choosing Layer>Layer via Copy
5. Zoom to 100%
6. In the Layers pallet, and with your new layer active, select Channels>Lightness (your image will look faded and monotone) You may need to turn off the 'a' and 'b' channels, as well.
7. Next, go to Filter>Unsharp Mask
8. Set the Radius at 1 px, Amount to 80, and Threshold to 4. Click OK
9. To apply more USM, use Ctrl+F. Repeat as necessary to achieve the desired sharpness
10. Flatten the image
11. Go back to Image>Mode and select RGB
12. Make a proof print to assess your sharpening and color.

Note that in the stages where you are applying USM, you can vary the numbers to suit.

I have used this technique extensively, and it works nicely.

--P

[Marko]

The book you're thinking of is Real World Image Sharpening (http://www.amazon.com/World-Sharpening-Photoshop-Camera-Lightroom/dp/0321637550/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269314658&sr=1-1). It's well worth the price of admission.

And the answer to your question is "No, that's not a decent sharpening practice." Read the book and you'll understand why.

I will second that.

If you really want to learn about sharpening, that's THE book. It was written by late Bruce Fraser, who knew more about the topic than all of us put together.

Just make sure you get the 2nd edition.

[Anders Korhonen]

I've been using this lately:

duplicate layer
filter/other/highpass ->radius depending on resolution, wanted effect, usually 0,5-1,5
change blending to overlay or soft light
adjust opacity
use mask to paint away unwanted areas

edit: have not tested by printing, only on screen

[Shutter]

For me "smart sharpen" (cs2 and up) is the best tool, you can control a lot of aspects and use different processes:

Amount: 200-500%
Radius: 0.1-0.2
Remove: Lens Blur

[x] More Accurate

[Greg Miller]

Here's my procedure for sharpening for color prints...

First, I do little sharpening in my scan. I then open the image in Photo Shop CS2.

I sharpen for print using the lightness channel in LAB color. As I understand it, if you sharpen in the lightness channel you do not run the risk of affecting color. Here's the procedure...

Using LAB Color and Lightness Channel in Photo Shop for Sharpening for Print:
1. Open you image in Photo Shop and size for the print size you want.
2. Flatten the image, if needed, by choosing Layer>Flatten
3. Next, go to Image>Mode and select Lab Color
4. Create a copy of the background layer by choosing Layer>Layer via Copy
5. Zoom to 100%
6. In the Layers pallet, and with your new layer active, select Channels>Lightness (your image will look faded and monotone) You may need to turn off the 'a' and 'b' channels, as well.
7. Next, go to Filter>Unsharp Mask
8. Set the Radius at 1 px, Amount to 80, and Threshold to 4. Click OK
9. To apply more USM, use Ctrl+F. Repeat as necessary to achieve the desired sharpness
10. Flatten the image
11. Go back to Image>Mode and select RGB
12. Make a proof print to assess your sharpening and color.

Note that in the stages where you are applying USM, you can vary the numbers to suit.

I have used this technique extensively, and it works nicely.

--P


The same thing can be accomplished without switching to LAB mode.

Just change the blending mode of the the layer being sharpened to "luminosity". This limits the sharpening to the luminosity (same as lightness channel of LAB mode) and avoids changing hue and saturation. If the same layer is also converted to a Smart Object first, then the sharpening is applied as a Smart Filter and be easily fine tuned without having to undo and redo the sharpening.

[bob carnie]

I do sharpening with both Greg and Preston's method.

I decide within the image which areas need to be sharpened and those which do not.
for flat open areas , leaves grass water flat concrete I will use medium amount , high radius and then use the opacity slider to taste and paint in these areas.
for sharp structures with defined lines I will use high amount, low radius and use the opacity slider to taste and paint in these areas.
My sharpening is image dependent and will back off if the feel of the image will look better softer , or go heavy if it will help.


All scanning is done with no sharpening, and first nuetralize the image in Ps
for most images I will use Greg's method as a starting point with very low settings, just to crisp up the image.
Then one or both local methods.

I am finding that inkjet rag handles the highest amount of sharpening and one has to back off if printing RA4 gloss prints. Therefore different settings for different end outputs.





The same thing can be accomplished without switching to LAB mode.

Just change the blending mode of the the layer being sharpened to "luminosity". This limits the sharpening to the luminosity (same as lightness channel of LAB mode) and avoids changing hue and saturation. If the same layer is also converted to a Smart Object first, then the sharpening is applied as a Smart Filter and be easily fine tuned without having to undo and redo the sharpening.

[Brian Ellis]

Basic Method:

Prepare for sharpening by doing the usual housekeeping (dupe, resize, flatten, inverse select areas that aren't to be sharpened at all such as the sky and other areas of uniform tone that contain no detail)
View image at 100%
Sharpen using USM in Photoshop until image looks just slightly too sharp (by clicking Preview on and off and adjusting Amount as needed)
Reduce view to full screen
Click Preview on and off to see how much effect sharpening will have at the settings determined in the previous step. The goal is to be able to see just a miniscule difference between sharpened and unsharpened as Preview is clicked on and off while viewing at full screen. Adjust Amount (and occasionally Radius) as necessary until that is achieved.
Click O.K.

If different areas in the image need different Amounts as they often do then select each such area and go through the above procedure for each area changing the Amount as appropriate.

My most common settings for landscapes are Radius 1 to 1.5, Threshold 0, and Amount ranging from about 70 to 130 or so.

I don't know, maybe there are better methods. I've certainly seen more complicated methods. I've also tried PK Sharpen and using Smart Sharpen instead of USM but I always end up going back to the above method. It does take a fair amount of experience with sharpening and printing to be able to make the necessary judgments. But I've been using it for many years and it's achieved my goal of sharpening the image to what I think is about its optimum amount while at the same time making sure it isn't over-sharpened. I almost never have to make a second print because of a sharpening problem with the first one. The first print is normally the last.

My single biggest concern with sharpening is to not over-sharpen since I really dislike that over-sharpened look that seems to be so common to many digital prints.

[Steve Gledhill]

No sharpening until it’s time to prepare for print or for other display, then:


Open a copy of the file, adjust to required output size then flatten.
Make a duplicate layer: LAYER > NEW > LAYER VIA COPY (or Ctrl J).
Then FILTER > OTHER > HIGH PASS and experiment with the radius – I suggest 1 pixel as a starter.
Now looks very weird until you change the new layer’s blend mode to OVERLAY.
Play with the Opacity of the layer – I usually stay at 100%
Instead of OVERLAY you can use SOFT LIGHT or HARD LIGHT (for softer or harder effect!)
And Bob’s your uncle ...

You can see the effect by clicking the new layer on and off.

Works for both colour and b&w. Like smart sharpening it works only on the edges to the extent shown by the edges in the HIGH PASS filter layer. So changing the radius changes the extent.

Once done using this method the radius cannot be adjusted – so if you want to try a different radius you need to back up and select a new radius for the HIGH PASS filter.

But don't overdo it ...

[Lenny Eiger]

i don't know where to begin. There is some questionable advice here. First of all, less is more. Second, flattening before printing is sometimes required when using a RIP but otherwise, you lose all your layers. I use a RIP, but I duplicate the file to make a printing file, select what I want sharpened, then flatten and then sharpen and save the file.

Flattening and going into other color spaces (and back and forth) is going to do bad things to your quality.

I would never use a radius of more than .8 - 1.0. I use a radius of .2 as I use a drum scanner and things are sharp to begin with (one of the reasons to use a drum scanner). I use an amt anywhere from 200-275, depending. One doesn't want to attempt to make things that are unsharp, sharp, you're just tightening things up. If you have sharp grains, that's all you are going to get. You can't actually sharpen something that is blurry to begin with. I would also recommend forgetting about opening up the lens to max sharpness and going for the depth of field instead. I think you get much more bang for your buck.

One key item is that you should never sharpen things like sky, or water. They usually need to be soft-looking for the image to read properly. Make a mask and sharpen the things you didn't mask off.

I have used high pass as well, but only on occasion. The useful thing about this is it can be painted in with a layer mask to sharpen very specific areas. I have also used edge masking techniques, but find them tedious for most needs...

I hope this helps...

Lenny

[Peter De Smidt]

After apply the final sharpening, you can immediately go to edit-fade [name of sharpening you use]. After you choose that, you can change the mode to luminosity, which is very similar to sharpening the L channel in Lab mode. You can also scale back the sharpening at this point.

[Ed Richards]

My method is for sharpening grey scale. To expand on what Lenny said, I sharpen on a duplicate layer so I never change the original pixels. Then I can add a layer mask and paint out or reduce the sharpening on the sky, or sharp edges - sometimes you want to use high pass and sharpening to bring up texture, but it blows the edges. You just paint those down to get rid of the halos. Fraiser's book is great, read it, especially if you do color, which is prone to a lot of sharpening problems.

[Lenny Eiger]

My method is for sharpening grey scale. To expand on what Lenny said, I sharpen on a duplicate layer so I never change the original pixels.

I don't totally disagree... but I'll qualify just a bit. It used to be that the basic thing was dup the background layer. I did it along with everyone else. Then we got adjustment layers and I stopped, except for once in a while, maybe when doing high pass, etc. I am usually working with large files and a file can go from a couple of Gigs to a lot more very quickly with those kinds of techniques... so I tend to stay away from them these days.... when I can.


Lenny

[bob carnie]

I tested the High pass, fade to luminosity in RGB, high amount low radius in Lab, medium amount high radius in Lab, also a combination of the two Lab methods on the same file.

Printed all five methods to 30x40 on high gloss RA4 at 400ppi.

They were all good and basically from a proper viewing distance all acceptable and we were not able to pick one over the other.. get to print sniffing distance and you can see the subtle differences.
I would say that it is not so important what method you use, rather you are careful not to make your work obvious..

[Jeffrey Sipress]

There must be a hundred different approaches to sharpening, and then all the dozens of products one can buy that automate the process for you. As expected, and like on the countless threads on photo forums, everyone's got their favorite and is happy to lay it out for you. I'm sure most will work well, and there is probably a bit of misinformation out there, too. Telling you what I do is a waste of time, as no one here will do the same as anyone else or even agree with it.

No, I'm not in THAT bad a mood today!

[Mike Anderson]

There must be a hundred different approaches to sharpening, and then all the dozens of products one can buy that automate the process for you. As expected, and like on the countless threads on photo forums, everyone's got their favorite and is happy to lay it out for you. I'm sure most will work well, and there is probably a bit of misinformation out there, too. Telling you what I do is a waste of time, as no one here will do the same as anyone else or even agree with it.

No, I'm not in THAT bad a mood today!

I find this brief survey of various sharpening methods is very useful. I won't blindly adopt any one method, but hearing other experienced people's techniques is useful. I've read a few books on Photoshop, and they all have a chapter on sharpening, but I don't think any of the authors was in the business of making large prints. The object here, for me, is to learn as much as I can without wasting too much time paper, and ink.

I appreciate everyone's response (but keep them coming).

Thanks,

...Mike

[Tyler Boley]

just one quick point, I believe to use the fade command to sharpen only luminosity, you need to sharpen, then UNDO, then edit/fade back in using luminosity as the blend mode.
Lastly, to really evaluate final sharpening, I can't get past having to see it on paper, at size, after many years.. just a small crop will do.
Tyler

[Peter De Smidt]

Tyler, what's your source for this? I briefly checked a number of references and none of them mentioned having to do an undo.

[gnuyork]

I never sharpen while scanning (unless I forget to uncheck the default USM in the Epson driver- which I have done), and then I use PhotoKit Sharpener by Pixel Genius (I think Bruce Fraser was part of) that runs you through steps for capture, creative, and output sharpening. I usually skip the creative sharpening, but the capture and output sharpen are great to use.

They are also non destructive and create layers that you can further tweak or turn off.

There are different choices in the capture sharpen mode for scanned film, 35mm, 4x5, slow speed, fast speed etc, as well as digital capture sharpen for low res to high res images.

The output stage lets you choose a sharpening for your intended output device, like web, ink jet print, or pre-press, etc.

One caveat is that you need to work with an RGB file, so if you scan grayscale, you'll need to convert to RGB before using PK sharpener. No big deal if you have a powerful computer, but if your computer is older, it may bog it down a bit.

I think it's $99. I got it at a discount, but I think it's well worth the money. It helps take the guess work out of sharpening for the most part.

Also sometimes in addition to using this, I use USM in PS to enhance micro contrast using a larger radius.

[Steve Gledhill]

... Lastly, to really evaluate final sharpening, I can't get past having to see it on paper, at size, after many years.. just a small crop will do.
Tyler
Hi Tyler - couldn't agree more ... the acid test.

[Greg Miller]

One true problem with Edit | Fade is that if you do any steps after that, then you cannot go back and fine tune the sharpening (without going back to that history state, if even available, and then redoing all subsequent work).

Better to use a layer with blending mode of Luminosity, which when also turning the layer into a smart object, provides you with the ability to fine tune the sharpening at any point in time (not to mention masking out unwanted areas of sharpening). This way also lets you see the sharpening in advance as luminosity and not HSL.

[Preston]

"Second, flattening before printing is sometimes required when using a RIP but otherwise, you lose all your layers. I use a RIP, but I duplicate the file to make a printing file, select what I want sharpened, then flatten and then sharpen and save the file."

I should clarify that I make a duplicate of a 'master' file, resize it to my immediate need then flatten and sharpen. My master image file retains all the layers, and this image is never sharpened.

I agree that there are probably as many different sharpening techniques as there are photographers, but it's interesting to see the different approaches to the task.

--P

[Tyler Boley]

Tyler, what's your source for this? I briefly checked a number of references and none of them mentioned having to do an undo.

Source?!?! SOURCE!!??? at my age???? You have sources, from the internets?
just unspecific accumulation of "way it works" crap rattling around in my brain... I certainly don't recall where I came across it specifically.
I just tested it and I think I was wrong and it's unnecessary. Seemed to result in the same done either way. Please continue with your regularly scheduled programming.
Tyler

[gnuyork]

Source?!?! SOURCE!!??? at my age???? You have sources, from the internets?
just unspecific accumulation of "way it works" crap rattling around in my brain... I certainly don't recall where I came across it specifically.
I just tested it and I think I was wrong and it's unnecessary. Seemed to result in the same done either way. Please continue with your regularly scheduled programming.
Tyler

I recall a technique similar to this, if not the same, where I had to do the undo and use the fade command. It's been a while, and I no longer use that technique.

[Ken Lee]

Going from smaller to larger formats, I have noticed that sharpening becomes less necessary - as long as print size remains the same - and even starts to degrade the natural look of an image.

Here's an example (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/img037aa.jpg) of a photo made on 5x7 film, which requires almost no sharpening whatsoever.

Here's another (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/img015.jpg). In fact, the little sharpening which has been done, may already be excessive.

[ronald moravec]

It is at least a two step process, once at the capture stage , once at final print stage.

The final sharpening on the computer must be seen on the print on the final medium, glossy is different than matt, both far different than computer screen, and it depends on final print size. Portraits are different than landscapes.

It is kind of a black art, but the book will help get through the weeds. $35 at Amazon.com

[mrladewig]

I shoot landscape primarily. For a while I was sharpening right up to the bleeding edge and sending it to the printer. At some point, it seemed to me that this was looking a bit unnatural and I decided to tone my sharpening down. Keep in mind that I'm sending to the Epson printer at 360ppi so the driver is not doing any interpolation. WYSIWIG in this case.

I let the scan software apply low USM before taking the file into photoshop. I'm of the mindset that the capture sharpening is beneficial to the final outcome, but I usually make a mess of it trying to go too far when I try to do it myself in photoshop.

I found that smart sharpen usually does a nice job with files originally captured digitally, but for me, it makes a mess of film scans and I avoid it unless I've resized down to web size. For prints I use unsharp mask in multiple passes. If I don't want the sharpness to bite, then I typically make passes at 75,.6,1 and 35,1,2. If I want more biting detail, then I'll make a first pass at 150,.4,1 before the other two.

[Sideshow Bob]

I use the action developed by Dan Margulis: http://layermonkey.com/node/115

Gale

[Mike Anderson]

I shoot landscape primarily. For a while I was sharpening right up to the bleeding edge and sending it to the printer. At some point, it seemed to me that this was looking a bit unnatural and I decided to tone my sharpening down.

One thing I've learned from this thread is that it's likely that I oversharpen.

...Mike

[Chris Strobel]

I sharpen by shooting things that are sharp to begin with :D

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4047/4479288599_4e750079f7_o.jpg