Sharpening

Urmas R. · 11-18-2008, 10:00 AM

I would be interested in knowing, whether any of you uses additional specific sharpening programs, like nik Sharpener.

Currently I do most of the sharpening in Silkypix as I think that by using the raw files I end up with more detail. When I do additional editing in Corel then I add some USM in the final stages. Sometimes I think though that the USM in Corel is not very sensitive and for fine detail sharpening I am now looking for more options.

deejjjaaaa · 11-18-2008, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Urmas R.

Currently I do most of the sharpening in Silkypix as I think that by using the raw files I end up with more detail.

as far as I understand sharpening in any raw converter is done _after_ demosaicing... so whether to do this in SP or afterwards on 16bit .TIFF/.PNG is a matter of preferences and available PP tools/plug-ins... if you prefer to do in rawconverter - consider Rawtherapee... it has better demosaicing and sharpening than SilkyPix...

PS: anybody willing to defend SilkyPix's demosaicing is welcome to visit this topic http://www.shortcutinc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217 and try to resolve the details using SP in the raw file given as an example.

Urmas R. · 11-19-2008, 02:24 PM

I have given RT so many tries and there are always a lot of bugs and glitches. I just downloaded it again and it seams it remains useless for me. First of all it is so slow compared to Silkypix. It takes ages to load a folder, while I have 4GB RAM with a new Quad processor! After finally opening an image I gave it a quick try and I do not see obvious difference in sfine detail resolution between Silkypix and RT.

In SP I use Normal Sharp and rise the edge detail to 14. When after more sharpness I reduce the Noise Cancel bar below 70 and Noise Level below 5. In case of backlit shots Pure Detail option works better than Normal Sharp. (These settings could be way too harsh for portraits)

I tested all raw converters for detail resolution about half a year ago and thought Silkypix and ACDSee Pro to be the best. The absolute worst performer was Capture One. One has to note that all the converters have some basic processing done, when a photo is opened. When in one converter the default contrast is higher it gives a wrong impression of more detail.

Now to the original topic. There are some algorithms available as separate programs, which sharpen the photo more accurately than the common USM. I think that they could be useful especially in case of macro photography. I tried the demo of Focus Magic and think it does a good job, but sometimes introduces ugly artifacts.

newmikey · 11-20-2008, 03:09 AM

I use scripted ImageMagick to apply a gaussian highpass filter on images that contain noise (like over 800ISO) but on regular images I use either Digikam's "circular sharpness" or ImageMagick USM.

MPrince · 11-20-2008, 03:58 AM

For the most part, I've stopped using USM to sharpen. I use this technique now, and I like the results much better.

Adobe Photoshop Tutorial | Digital Photography | Sharpen Photo | High Pass Filter | Layers Magazine

**roentarre** · 11-20-2008, 06:25 AM

just USM sharpening in the photoshop.

kbrabble · 11-20-2008, 06:37 AM

I use the focalblade plugin in corel psp x2, and highly recommend it.

kerrowdown · 11-20-2008, 07:47 AM

Me, two passes with USM (at different settings) and a percentage merge with another layer.

RBellavance · 11-20-2008, 08:58 AM

I'm well pleased with the result of the Smart Sharpening (Redux) plugin for The Gimp.

The technique is described in this GimpGuru article, and the plugin can be downloaded from the Gimp Plugin Registry.