[Isaac314]

I have the idea that it would improve the camera's performance (speed), and also help me cope with noise.

Selective sharpening is the one process all my photos go through in photoshop, so i feel like in camera sharpening is only going to damage the photos and photoshop does a better job anyway

Does anyone else do this and what are the side-affects or downsides?

Thanks.

p.s. i also do noise reduction in cs2, i use the lowest noise reduction in all my settings but still in 30 second exposures the camera tries to reduce noise... I have tried just turning the camera off and on straight after the shot but there must be a simpler way that i am missing?

[rburgoss]

Turning off sharpess (or at least setting it to lowest setting) is indeed an interesting idea. _As you say, pp selective sharpening can do a better job and at least, get rid of some nasty noise.

As for turning off NR with your K20D, good luck if you can. Many here (including me) have complained about the fact that it cannot be turned off.

Robert B.

[Mindflux]

Turning off sharpess (or at least setting it to lowest setting) is indeed an interesting idea. _As you say, pp selective sharpening can do a better job and at least, get rid of some nasty noise.

As for turning off NR with your K20D, good luck if you can. Many here (including me) have complained about the fact that it cannot be turned off.

Robert B.

NR can be turned off? When it's on it only applies to JPEGs anwyay isn't it? or is there a RAW NR that is separate from the NR adjustment in the camera?

[Gooshin]

in camera sharpness affects jpeg output only

if you shoot in raw, you shouldnt care

if you shoot in jpeg, why are you post processing?

[Isaac314]

in camera sharpness affects jpeg output only

if you shoot in raw, you shouldnt care

if you shoot in jpeg, why are you post processing?

Ha, simple, i don't pixel peep and my laptop is too shit to work with 15 mp raw files. Plus i have yet to find an infinite capacity hard drive in my price range...

Also, I find the jpegs to be good enough to work with in most circumstances and much faster too. Just look at my flickr and please tell me how shooting raw could make my photos better? In professional work where i will spend days on an image i shoot raw, but any other time it is pointless.

[Isaac314]

NR can be turned off? When it's on it only applies to JPEGs anwyay isn't it? or is there a RAW NR that is separate from the NR adjustment in the camera?

I think robert refers only to the long exposure noise reduction, which is apparently stuck to on.

[snostorm]

I have the idea that it would improve the camera's performance (speed), and also help me cope with noise.

Selective sharpening is the one process all my photos go through in photoshop, so i feel like in camera sharpening is only going to damage the photos and photoshop does a better job anyway

Does anyone else do this and what are the side-affects or downsides?

Hi Isaac,

PP for the K20 is still a work in progress for me, but I have found that the K10 and K20 in-camera sharpening uses an algorithm that generally increases the dark end in the contrast enhancement. I believe that they wanted to not have the bright halos normally associated with sharpening.

The downside of this is that additional sharpening in PP can sometimes cause the lighter areas of a subject to be outlined in black.

I have, so far, chosen to set the in-camera sharpening to 0 or +1 max, and have found that though the images look a soft, they still retain the detail that I need. I do selective sharpening in PP with Focus Magic and/or High Pass Sharpening-- preferring lower settings and multiple passes to a one-step shot. I also do the sharpening before and during any downsizing to emphasize detail if appropriate. I don't need the max resolution for most of my prints, so I sometimes use downsizing to control the background noise in lieu of dedicated NR programs. With the K20, this can be pretty effective if the chroma component of the noise isn't too prominent.

BTW, and FWIW, I shoot jpegs almost exclusively. For the great bulk of my shooting, I've found little advantage in IQ, and significant downsides in performance, time, and storage space shooting RAW.

Scott

[jsherman999]

.

I shoot jpegs almost exclusively, usually on 'bright' setting, Fine sharpening +1 or +2. I think the Fine sharpening setting on the K20D is worth looking in to - allows for some PP sharpening later, more so than regular sharpening, IMO.


.

[pentkon52]

in camera sharpness affects jpeg output only

if you shoot in raw, you shouldnt care

if you shoot in jpeg, why are you post processing?

I shoot 99% jpeg. every photo needs~some~ processing. Please don't tell me other wize

Dave

[cpopham]

I have the idea that it would improve the camera's performance (speed)

I think that part of your thinking is probably flawed on this point. Remember that a camera has a dedicated image processor, and sharpening is expect to be applied to EVERY image, and as such, is done very quickly, often by dedicated hardware. Attempting to disable sharpening probably doesn't change the speed of the image processing stage at all.

[Canada_Rockies]

I have the idea that it would improve the camera's performance (speed), and also help me cope with noise.

Selective sharpening is the one process all my photos go through in photoshop, so i feel like in camera sharpening is only going to damage the photos and photoshop does a better job anyway

Does anyone else do this and what are the side-affects or downsides?

Thanks.

p.s. i also do noise reduction in cs2, i use the lowest noise reduction in all my settings but still in 30 second exposures the camera tries to reduce noise... I have tried just turning the camera off and on straight after the shot but there must be a simpler way that i am missing?

I have all the defaults set to 0 in my k10d, but I shoot RAW, so it makes no never mind anyway. I also turn off noise reduction. If I need noise reduction, I want to control it myself, not have my camera do it for me. I grew up with film grain, and really don't think Pentax' high ISO noise is anything to sweat over. If I really get uptight about it, I'll get the K40D in a few years.

[Gooshin]

Ha, simple, i don't pixel peep and my laptop is too shit to work with 15 mp raw files. Plus i have yet to find an infinite capacity hard drive in my price range...

Also, I find the jpegs to be good enough to work with in most circumstances and much faster too. Just look at my flickr and please tell me how shooting raw could make my photos better? In professional work where i will spend days on an image i shoot raw, but any other time it is pointless.

a difficult scene will have more dynamic range to work with if kept raw rather than allowing your camera to process it.

also, should you do anything else with the image other miniscule increases in contrast/sharpness, like full blown colour reconfiguration, upsizing, stiching, and so forth, you're just losing out on finer gradations

but since your computer is ass none of this matters to you, does it?

I shoot 99% jpeg. every photo needs~some~ processing. Please don't tell me other wize

Dave

if you shoot 99% jpeg that means your experience with RAW is very limited, so why are you getting defensive with someone that shoots 100% raw?

i'm not telling you anything, but if you are post processing a jpeg that means the camera is not doing what you want it to do, and since you're going to work on a picture ANYWAY might as well do it with the most amount of information possible!

but hey, you guys obviously dont like bulky files, because 15 megabytes is OHH SO LARGE...

[Isaac314]

I have, so far, chosen to set the in-camera sharpening to 0 or +1 max, and have found that though the images look a soft, they still retain the detail that I need. I do selective sharpening in PP with Focus Magic and/or High Pass Sharpening-- preferring lower settings and multiple passes to a one-step shot. I also do the sharpening before and during any downsizing to emphasize detail if appropriate. I don't need the max resolution for most of my prints, so I sometimes use downsizing to control the background noise in lieu of dedicated NR programs. With the K20, this can be pretty effective if the chroma component of the noise isn't too prominent.

BTW, and FWIW, I shoot jpegs almost exclusively. For the great bulk of my shooting, I've found little advantage in IQ, and significant downsides in performance, time, and storage space shooting RAW.

Thanks, this has been the most useful so far.

I really dont want this to turn into a jpeg vs raw thread. I have heard on a few reviewers that the dynamic range in jpegs is just as good as in raw. Other quality problems are removed in downsizing. I am planning on selling prints in the future and so far if a scene really catches my eye i either HDR it (which, if done subtly, pretty much triples the amount of detail you get in a photo as well as expanding the dynamic range), or i shoot one shot in raw for working on later.

a difficult scene will have more dynamic range to work with if kept raw rather than allowing your camera to process it.

True, but if you bring out the highlights and shadows from a raw file you will produce a lot of noise and are better off making a composite image. With people and action photos though, i agree. But raw is not an effective way of dealing with wide dynamic range.

but hey, you guys obviously dont like bulky files, because 15 megabytes is OHH SO LARGE...

It is when you only have 192mb of ram!


anyway, i think questions have been answered, so thanks everyone

[Kerrowdown]

Gooshin, beat me to it

[pentkon52]

a difficult scene will have more dynamic range to work with if kept raw rather than allowing your camera to process it.

also, should you do anything else with the image other miniscule increases in contrast/sharpness, like full blown colour reconfiguration, upsizing, stiching, and so forth, you're just losing out on finer gradations

but since your computer is ass none of this matters to you, does it?



if you shoot 99% jpeg that means your experience with RAW is very limited, so why are you getting defensive with someone that shoots 100% raw?

i'm not telling you anything, but if you are post processing a jpeg that means the camera is not doing what you want it to do, and since you're going to work on a picture ANYWAY might as well do it with the most amount of information possible!

but hey, you guys obviously dont like bulky files, because 15 megabytes is OHH SO LARGE...

I shoot jpg because i usually take 1200-1500 equine action shots a weekend. Keeps the file sizes down. Usually a photo needs a minor tweak in PS for levels or WB correction, thats about it.

I do shoot in Raw, but my knowledge of it is not limited BTW.

You keep doing what you like, and I'll keep doing what I like. Seems to work, as i am making money.

Dave