Posting photos that look good

[timbo10ca]

This depends on how you are sharpening. I have CS2 and sharpen in 3 stages - 1. source sharpening of scan, 2. content sharpening and 3. output sharpening on layers and masked for edges as per Bruce Frasers recommendations (ref Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop CS2) and implemented in PhotoKit Sharpener.

Rob- could you please elaborate a bit on this? I'm not sure what the difference between source sharpening and content sharpening would be. I'm not familiar with these terms, and you're 3rd step is total greek to me. I've been using USM, and have found the Smart Sharpen not to be useful- no user control, it seems. I've recently learned about sharpening in LAB, but haven't tried it yet (mostly because I'm currently working on a bunch of B&W images, and the way I understand it, LAB sharpening seems to be for color). I've also heard of sharpening using a high pass filter, but haven't figured this one out. There seems to be as many ways to sharpen as there are opinions on it.

Thanks,
Tim

[Joanna Carter]

I sharpen prior to resizing because it's my ready-to-print final image. I have noticed quality loss when printing at lower dpi settings (300), so I leave the file at it's maximum dpi and print it, regardless of print size.

Do you understand the difference between file resolution and printer resolution?

Certainly you have to print at as high a resolution in dpi as you can get but, the file need only be at 240ppi - 300ppi. There really is no connection between the resolution set in the printer dialog and the resolution of the file.

If you scan at 2400ppi without any scaling, you will get an image that is 4" x 5" @ 2400ppi. This is much too high a resolution to make any sense for a manipulation and you have effectively got an image that is 4" x 5".

I would guess that you are resizing to fit a certain size of paper but, do you resample the image at the same 2400ppi, or do you simply alter the resolution until the print is the size you want, without resampling?

When I prepped a couple of my exhibition prints for printing on a LightJet, the final file had to be only 300ppi, and that was perfectly good enough for a 30" x 24" edge-to-edge print.

[RJC]

Rob- could you please elaborate a bit on this? I'm not sure what the difference between source sharpening and content sharpening would be. I'm not familiar with these terms, and you're 3rd step is total greek to me.

Digital capture, whether a scan or using a digital camera, tends to soften the original image due to anti-aliasing filters, the application of ICE to remove dust and scratches etc. Source sharpening refers to a global (subtle) sharpening of the original image to counteract the afore-mentioned softening. This phase of sharpening is done using a mask to isolate the edges within the scene to reduce the possibilty of enhancing noise in the image.

'Content sharpening' refers to 2-phase sharpening based (1) on the frequency distribution of edges within the image (e.g. a portrait requires significantly different sharpening than a high-position view of a dense cityscape) followed by (2) 'artistic' sharpening determined by the photographer's artistic interpretation of the scene and which parts therein require relative sharpening for emphasis etc. This phase of sharpening is done on a blended layer in luminosity mode (similar to sharpening in the luminosity channel in LAB).

The 3rd stage is a global sharpening layer with a high pass filter with parameters determined by the output resolution of the printing device.

I always sharpen non-destructively on layers, and where necessary with edge-masks as previously mentioned. Bruce Fraser, from whom I picked up these techniques from his afore-mentioned book, is a renowned expert on Photoshop, and in conjunction with another expert, Martin Evening, developed the Pixel Genius PhotoKit Sharpener that employs thses techniques. At the time I read his and Martin Evening's books I could not afford to purchase their software so wrote my own set of Photoshop actions to implement the same sharpening techniques (all I had to do was to attempt to fully understand everything in their books !).

Rob

[Frank Petronio]

Bruce was the expert but he passed away so don't go looking for his CS4 book....

You don't have to use sharpening layers, although they are nice, but piling up a stack of adjustments layers really adds to the file size and performance issues with larger files. The important point is that you need to save an "archive" or "master" file at your maximum useful resolution and you'll want to sharpen it just enough that aren't degrading anything in your image (usually you get subtle halos around the edges of the most contrasty transitions.) Once you save (and back up) your master archive file, then you can resize -- and adjust, usually with more sharpening -- various sized "output" files for different sized prints, reproduction, and internet use using the "Save As" and "Save for Web" File commands.

I save single layered archive/master files. It forces me to make decisions about the file. That is not necessarily a bad thing -- leaving every aspect infinitely adjustable means that it will be infinitely adjusted!

[RJC]

I agree entirely Frank. My master/archive file is almost always a single layer file saved after flattening the layers after source and content sharpening as a use-neutral master. I occasionaly need to save the sharpening layers but tend to avoid this if possible- however during editing sharpening layers are extremely useful to adjust the sharpening until completely satisified with the result rather than to keep re-opening the image and repeating the sharpening steps.

These are ideas culled from Bruce's book, I don't claim any originality in this regard, but I'll hang onto my copy for CS2 given the news that he has sadly passed away (I'd not heard this news before).

Rob

[Daniel_Buck]

are you scanning B&W film? Are you scanning it as greyscale? if you are, you want to convert it to RGB before you save it out as a .jpg for the web.

[Frank Petronio]

When you save as a jpg the greyscale automagically becomes RGB. Using Adobe's Save For Web command allows you to retain a color profile and metadata w the jpg, although people suggest that web jpgs should either use the sRGB profile or none at all (the Save For Web default strips the profile off).

[timbo10ca]

Do you understand the difference between file resolution and printer resolution?

Certainly you have to print at as high a resolution in dpi as you can get but, the file need only be at 240ppi - 300ppi. There really is no connection between the resolution set in the printer dialog and the resolution of the file.

If you scan at 2400ppi without any scaling, you will get an image that is 4" x 5" @ 2400ppi. This is much too high a resolution to make any sense for a manipulation and you have effectively got an image that is 4" x 5".

I would guess that you are resizing to fit a certain size of paper but, do you resample the image at the same 2400ppi, or do you simply alter the resolution until the print is the size you want, without resampling?

When I prepped a couple of my exhibition prints for printing on a LightJet, the final file had to be only 300ppi, and that was perfectly good enough for a 30" x 24" edge-to-edge print.

I know the difference between ppi of scan and dpi of output. I just have never altered my file ppi size prior to printing, other than one time and found the print resolution to be poor in comparison. I'll give you the scenario- I scanned a 35mm slide with a Nikon Coolscan VED at max resolution (4000ppi). File size was not a problem for speed in PS so I left it. I printed an 8x10 with the file document size resolution in PS set at 4000 and then at 300. I could see a degredation in print quality with the 300ppi setting. So now I print at the max resolution I scanned at. Now that I'm doing LF film, the files are too bulky to leave at max scan size for editing, so I reduce to "true" scanner resolution (I'm optimistic and use 2400ppi on my V750). Regardless of the print size, I leave the resolution at the max, and just change the print dimensions. What the software does then, I don't know...... Sometimes I use the Windows print tool, sometimes Photoshop.

Tim

[timbo10ca]

Bruce was the expert but he passed away so don't go looking for his CS4 book....

You don't have to use sharpening layers, although they are nice, but piling up a stack of adjustments layers really adds to the file size and performance issues with larger files. The important point is that you need to save an "archive" or "master" file at your maximum useful resolution and you'll want to sharpen it just enough that aren't degrading anything in your image (usually you get subtle halos around the edges of the most contrasty transitions.) Once you save (and back up) your master archive file, then you can resize -- and adjust, usually with more sharpening -- various sized "output" files for different sized prints, reproduction, and internet use using the "Save As" and "Save for Web" File commands.

I save single layered archive/master files. It forces me to make decisions about the file. That is not necessarily a bad thing -- leaving every aspect infinitely adjustable means that it will be infinitely adjusted!

I'm still trying to figure layers out for some of this stuff. So far, I can't seem how to use the clone stamp, dodge and burn, or sharpen in a layer- I do the action, but nothing happens on the picture.

Is your single layer master file pre or post editing- if it's post, that's exactly what I'm doing- creating a master file that is print ready, then reducing size of the ones I post..... If it's pre-editing, I can't see why anybody would want to waste the time re-editing a photo once it's been reduced to the size you plan to make that single print as. Either way, I'm confused as to why I'm being told that what I'm doing is the wrong way to do it It seems to me that my workflow is exactly what you've just described. I do admit though, that my sharpening thus far lacks finesse. The methods Rob is describing sounds like what I'm trying to get my head around. Gotta find that book, or something on the net describing the process..... At least I now know about LAB- I just haven't used it yet.

Tim

[timbo10ca]

are you scanning B&W film? Are you scanning it as greyscale? if you are, you want to convert it to RGB before you save it out as a .jpg for the web.

Hey Daniel- I'm scanning color trannies and B&W negs. For B&W, I've been playing around with a couple different methods- scanning as greyscale 16 BIT, and scanning as RGB 48 BIT then using the Green channel (apparently the sharpest/best to use from reading around here and elsewhere) or using the Red channel (may seem to look better sometimes, but I may be fooling myself????). To be honest, I don't know if I can see much of a difference and scanning in RGB just seems to make bigger files. I've been pretty happy with the Greyscale files I've produced so far. Mind you, I haven't printed many of them yet. I run files through an action to reduce file size, convert to RGB, and save as jpg. I do not use "Save for Web".

Tim