ACR (or Lr) Capture Sharpening workflow clarification please

[FrankG]

I am processing and Capture sharpening in ACR before saving as Tifs to continue processing in PS. I will then Output sharpen in PS for printing.

In ACR, the files are being up-sampled (see attached screenshot) to a larger print size.
Original file is 16mb - 4592x3448px, and new size is 38mb - 7200x5400px

Does it matter if I go to the Details tab for the Capture sharpening and NR settings before or after setting the new size ?

If, as I understand it, the capture sharpening is based on the resolution asked for when the image is rendered (at the up-res'd size). To me that means I should be applying sharpening at the larger new size.

But, I have also read that Capture sharpening should be done prior to re-sizing up, and that it should be done on the native resolution of the image (the original size).

If I do it at the native /original file size, the advantage is that I could come back to this "master" file in the future and save to PS for different output (web or print and at different sizes).
If I up-res first, and do the sharpening before saving to PS then the so-called master is an interpolated enlargement which is good for this one-time printing, but not necessarily for future output.

Can someone knowledgeable clarify the workflow for me please.
And I want to accomplish this with my existing PS CS6 and ACR (8.3.0) so I don't want to be side-tracked to other progams please.

[Simon Garrett]

In ACR, the files are being up-sampled (see attached screenshot) to a larger print size.
Original file is 16mb - 4592x3448px, and new size is 38mb - 7200x5400px

A question of clarification to your question of clarification please: why are you up-sampling the image?  The reason for doing that isn't obvious to me. 

[FrankG]

Because at the end of the process I'll print 15 x 20 inch prints @ 360ppi. The original files are 4592x3448px = 12.75 x 9.5 inches @360 ppi

[Simon Garrett]

Because at the end of the process I'll print 15 x 20 inch prints @ 360ppi. The original files are 4592x3448px = 12.75 x 9.5 inches @360 ppi

Understood, thanks for the clarification.  I usually don't know the final required resolution, or I might need multiple resolutions, so avoid any resizing until the final stage, to avoid a possible two resizing operations (as any resizing can slightly impair the image).

Sorry for the diversion.

'Fraid I'm not an expert on sharpening, but I thought capture sharpening was to deal with artefacts introduced as a result of image capture, including de-mosaic and any anti-alias.  As a result, I have always assumed that capture sharpening should be done at the original resolution, as you suggest.  I would have assumed that ACR would do any capture sharpening before resizing, but I've not investigated as I rarely use ACR (I use Lightroom).   

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I am processing and Capture sharpening in ACR before saving as Tifs to continue processing in PS. I will then Output sharpen in PS for printing.

In ACR, the files are being up-sampled (see attached screenshot) to a larger print size.
Original file is 16mb - 4592x3448px, and new size is 38mb - 7200x5400px

Does it matter if I go to the Details tab for the Capture sharpening and NR settings before or after setting the new size ?

Hi Frank,

The settings in the detail panel will be applied to the native Raw file size, and that's what the preview shows.

If, as I understand it, the capture sharpening is based on the resolution asked for when the image is rendered (at the up-res'd size). To me that means I should be applying sharpening at the larger new size.

In LR there is another additional round of sharpening applied on the exported image (presumably) after resizing, but that is just a simple choice from a few predefined settings. However, I'd be careful with that if you anticipate doing more sharpening later in the finalization for printing, eg. if the predefined settings are not what you want to use.
 

But, I have also read that Capture sharpening should be done prior to re-sizing up, and that it should be done on the native resolution of the image (the original size).

Yes, and for Capture sharpening that is what happens with the settings in the Detail panel. Since you will be resizing to a larger output size, be careful to avoid any visible sharpening artifacts in that step, because after enlargement the artifacts would be even easier to see.

Cheers,
Bart

[FrankG]

Clarify still a little further please (not feeling too smart, maybe it's my flu :-) ...

Assuming I make all the adjustments in the basic tab (ACR) and then the capture sharpening in the Detail tab while the file is still set at it's original size - see attached, and I then go down to the Workflow Options link under the image and up-res it before saving as a Tif, doesn't that still 1. leave me with an up-res'd master file, and 2. give me an enlarged file at the required size but that was Capture sharpened at a much smaller size ?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Clarify still a little further please (not feeling too smart, maybe it's my flu :-) ...

Assuming I make all the adjustments in the basic tab (ACR) and then the capture sharpening in the Detail tab while the file is still set at it's original size - see attached, and I then go down to the Workflow Options link under the image and up-res it before saving as a Tif, doesn't that still 1. leave me with an up-res'd master file, and 2. give me an enlarged file at the required size but that was Capture sharpened at a much smaller size ?

2.

There is no other way to preview the settings that are applied at the native size. And in the Workflow options dialog, you have the Output sharpening, "Sharpen for" unchecked or set to "None", which means no additional sharpening after resizing. That also means you still need to do additional sharpening at the final/native printer resolution, or choose a different preset.

Cheers,
Bart

[FrankG]

you have the Output sharpening, "Sharpen for" unchecked or set to "None", which means no additional sharpening after resizing. That also means you still need to do additional sharpening at the final/native printer resolution, or choose a different preset.

I am only concerned with the Capture Sharpening now (in ACR). I will concern myself with Output sharpening at the last stage of PS work prior to printing. Also depending if I'm printing on an Epson or sending to a lab for continuous tone (Chromira or LightJet)

So, correct me if I've misunderstood, I will leave the file at it's original / native size and do all corrections in the Basic tab and all the Capture sharpening in the Details tab. When that is all done I will go to the Workflow options link and up-res it as required, and Save as a Tif.

Once the up-res'd file is Saved (as Tif) & Done. I can go back to the Workflow Options link and return it to it's original size for future work.

[Dave Ellis]

Hi Frank

This question intrigued me so I decided to do a little test. The two attached images are 100% crops. The first one was edited in ACR at normal resolution (6000x4000) and the second was upsized to 12000x8000 using the ACR Workflow Output option. The same (extreme) ACR sharpening settings were used for each (Amount 150, Radius 1.5) to produce very prominent halos. In the second image, the halos extend over twice as many pixels as they do in the first image, which suggests to me that sharpening is applied at the native resolution in each case(as Bart says) - the halos have been upsized just like the rest of the image.

Dave

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

If you have a workflow that include work in PS I would suggest that you can turn of sharpening in ACR/LR entirely and use a good sharpening plugin like FocusMagic to do the sharpening. That is what I would do now. But, for printing I would use LR-sharpening.

Personally, I prefer to have a Lightroom only workflow, so I do like 95% of my images in Lightroom only, keeping a parametric workflow.

Bart would probably argue, that better results are possible using Focus Magic and Topaz tools, and I don't digress.

If I make a large print, like 70x100 cm, I would probably prepare the image very carefully in Photoshop, use Focus Magic and possibly also Topaz Detail.

But, in general I want a credible image and try to keep manipulation somewhat limited. Also, keep in mind that what you see on the screen is not what you get in print.

I made an experiment recently using different workflows and print (a crop) really large (like 100x150 cm), I tested both Capture One and LR with LR's internal sharpening and with FocusMagic and the Capture One image looked best. But I needed to pixel peep the prints to see the difference. Either processing would make a great print.

I would say that Bart is probably right what he says, he is very knowledgeable and very experienced and also extremely helpful. It is really nice to have guys like him on LuLa.

Sharpening in Lightroom was developed with cooperation of Jeff Schewe (and also Buce Frazer?) and is said to be very similar to Photokit sharpener. So there is a lot of expert knowledge behind those tools. Problem with sharpening for print is that you need to print a lot to find the optimal sharpening.

Best regards
Erik

[FrankG]

The two attached images are 100% crops. The first one was edited in ACR at normal resolution (6000x4000) and the second was upsized to 12000x8000 using the ACR Workflow Output option. The same (extreme) ACR sharpening settings were used for each (Amount 150, Radius 1.5) to produce very prominent halos. In the second image, the halos extend over twice as many pixels as they do in the first image, which suggests to me that sharpening is applied at the native resolution in each case(as Bart says) - the halos have been upsized just like the rest of the image.

Thanks for doing and sharing your tests.
The second  (up-sampled) image is obviously twice the size of the first. They need to be the same enlarged size.
My challenge is to understand the difference between capture sharpening at native res, then up-sampling. And up-sampling first, then capture sharpening. That is both tests would need to be the same size (up-sampled). Make sense? Because I don't have the question clear in my own head, I'm finding it hard to articulate it.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

My challenge is to understand the difference between capture sharpening at native res, then up-sampling. And up-sampling first, then capture sharpening.

In the first case you can use the Detail panel controls to do the Capture sharpening at native size, but when upsampling you will kind of blur that by adding more pixels but no resolution. In the second case you do create more pixels to apply sharpening to, which could be more accurate and a bit sharper, but you only have the output sharpening presets available.

An additional problem with the first approach is that any artifacts created during Capture sharpening will become enlarged and more visible, and when the output sharpening is added it potentially gets worse.

Having said that, the differences may be small enough to be difficult to see in print. Things become different when you use something like Benvista's "PhotoZoom Pro" for upsampling, because that adds resolution to thin line and sharp edge features, while suppressing artifacts. So that would allow Capture sharpening at the native resolution, upsample while adding resolution and some sharpening, and have a better result (depending on subject matter/detail you begin with). But that involves leaving LR, and postprocessing (PhotoZoom upsampling and adjustable sharpening at the final print size) for print, either with a Photoshop plugin or as a standalone application. onOne's "Perfect Resize" can also upsample while adding resolution and adjustable sharpening.

Cheers,
Bart

[FrankG]

Please let me digest your info slowly, and let's only deal with PS +ACR. For now, that's all I have.

Firstly, 'capture sharpening at native res, then up-sampling' - I understand what you are saying "you will kind of blur that by adding more pixels but no resolution".
Secondly, 'up-sampling first, then capture sharpening.' -  I understand what you are saying "you do create more pixels to apply sharpening to, which could be more accurate and a bit sharper".

I don't understand "but you only have the output sharpening presets available."
In ACR I have no output sharpening presets, and anyway even if i did, I will only apply output sharpening at the final stage before printing out of PS.
In PS I may still first do some other 'creative' sharpening and/or further contrast control/dodging/burning/retouching/tweaking.

Can we go back to square one and start at the very beginning. I have Original files 16mb - 4592x3448px, and need new size at 38mb - 7200x5400px.
I need prints 15 x 20 inch prints @ 360ppi but the original files are 4592x3448px = 12.75 x 9.5 inches @360 ppi
How do I best get there in PS/ACR (I have no other programs at the moment)?

Here is my workflow so far:
1. Basic Panel - WB, Exp, Con, Blacks, Whites, Hifhlights, Shadows, Clarity, Vibrance
2. Details panel - A, R, D, M and LNR
3. Workflow Options dialog - Image resizing> resize to fit (enter the new size)>click OK
4. Save image > tif
5. Then I go back to Workflow Options dialog and un-check re-size (to revert to original size for future use)>click OK & revert back to ACR window >click Done
6. Then I open the Tif in PS

My original question is whether to do step 3 before step 2.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Please let me digest your info slowly, and let's only deal with PS +ACR. For now, that's all I have.

Firstly, 'capture sharpening at native res, then up-sampling' - I understand what you are saying "you will kind of blur that by adding more pixels but no resolution".
Secondly, 'up-sampling first, then capture sharpening.' -  I understand what you are saying "you do create more pixels to apply sharpening to, which could be more accurate and a bit sharper".

I don't understand "but you only have the output sharpening presets available."

That was assuming you used Lightroom to do the upsampling and output sharpening. Apparently we're talking Photoshop only. There you would still have the Output Sharpening option in the Workflow options dialog box.

In ACR I have no output sharpening presets, and anyway even if i did, I will only apply output sharpening at the final stage before printing out of PS.
In PS I may still first do some other 'creative' sharpening and/or further contrast control/dodging/burning/retouching/tweaking.

You do have an Output sharpening option in the workflow options dialog. The ACR conversion basically only offers Capture Sharpening at the native Raw file size. The Workflow options Output Sharpening is applied to the resized for output file size.
 

Can we go back to square one and start at the very beginning. I have Original files 16mb - 4592x3448px, and need new size at 38mb - 7200x5400px.
I need prints 15 x 20 inch prints @ 360ppi but the original files are 4592x3448px = 12.75 x 9.5 inches @360 ppi
How do I best get there in PS/ACR (I have no other programs at the moment)?

'Best' is a bit subjective, but this is what I would do with only Photoshop/ACR. Try Capture sharpening with the ACR Detail panel. As to the best settings, that's another story (Radius depends on lens quality and aperture used, Amount depends on the level of the "Detail" control you can use without creating horrible artifacts, and the masking used to hide the artifacts in featureless areas).

If you have sharpening tools like FocusMagic, then I'd be reluctant to do any sharpening in ACR, because FocusMagic is much better at Capture sharpening. You could use it on native size ACR conversions or on Workflow options upsampled ACR conversions.

Because there are more pixels in the upsampled file versions, you can probably push the Output Sharpening further than the presets of Workflow options Output Sharpening offer, and immediately see if artifacts are created at the final print size if you do it yourself on the output resized TIFF. And as always with printing, you can even overdo the sharpening visually, because due to losses later in the output dithering/media in diffusion the extra will not be a problem.

Here is my workflow so far:
1. Basic Panel - WB, Exp, Con, Blacks, Whites, Hifhlights, Shadows, Clarity, Vibrance
2. Details panel - A, R, D, M and LNR
3. Workflow Options dialog - Image resizing> resize to fit (enter the new size)>click OK
4. Save image > tif
5. Then I go back to Workflow Options dialog and un-check re-size (to revert to original size for future use)>click OK & revert back to ACR window >click Done
6. Then I open the Tif in PS

My original question is whether to do step 3 before step 2.

You cannot do step 3 before step 2, unless you reopen a TIFF conversion with ACR.

Step 2 is applied to the native Raw file size, step 3 then (in your case) upsamples that, and optionally in the same workflow dialog box you can add some output sharpening (the Output Sharpening checkbox), which is done after the resampling, with an amount that you can choose from a few presets.

If you have a pluging like FocusMagic, I'd use that to do most if not all sharpening after the workflow upsampling to 360 PPI final print size.

Cheers,
Bart

[FrankG]

Thank you for this help Bart.
I think that I am clearer now, and that I'm on the right track with my existing workflow and the order of operations.
I previously ignored the Output sharpening in the Workflow dialog because I always understood that it is best done right at the end immediately prior to printing.

If I do regular up-resing and printing in the future, I will consider purchasing Focus Magic and one of the programs for up-res'ing as you recommend. But for now I want to maximise the IQ with just ACR / PS (cs6)

When I open the Tif in PS, and if the image needs some more 'creative' sharpening ( prior to Output sharpening/printing), I sometimes give it 'pop or definition' with a duplicate layer & High Pass filter 1px + Gaussian Blur .5 set to Linear light.

[Dave Ellis]

Thanks for doing and sharing your tests.
The second  (up-sampled) image is obviously twice the size of the first. They need to be the same enlarged size.
My challenge is to understand the difference between capture sharpening at native res, then up-sampling. And up-sampling first, then capture sharpening. That is both tests would need to be the same size (up-sampled). Make sense? Because I don't have the question clear in my own head, I'm finding it hard to articulate it.

Frank my reasoning was that because they are both 100% crops, they show the detail at pixel level. The second shot shows an upsized version of the first and it appears that the halos have been upsized just like the rectangle. In other words, the sharpening appears to have been done on the native size in each case.

To take this further, I did another test as follows.

Open the same image in ACR
Upsize it as before but with no sharpening
Save this as a tiff
Open this tiff in ACR and apply the same (capture) sharpening as before.

Here is a 100% crop of this. Notice that the sharpening halos are much less prominent.

Dave

[FrankG]

Dave. Wow what a difference !
Not only the halo around the rectangle, but also the rest of the frame is pretty free of artifacts too.

So in the first instance you capture sharpened the original file in ACR and upsized it 100%.
In the second instance  you just upsized it 100%. Saved it as Tif and re-opened it in ACR and capture sharpened it
Is this correct?

Would the workflow look like this:
1. ACR> Basic Panel - WB, Exp, Con, Blacks, Whites, Highlights, Shadows, Clarity, Vibrance

2. ACR> Workflow Options dialog - Image resizing> check resize box (enter the new up-res size) >click OK

3. ACR> Save image > Tif

4. ACR> Workflow Options dialog – uncheck the resize box to keep raw master at original size for future use [Optional step]
>Done

5. Re-open saved Tif in ACR

6. Capture Sharpen > ACR Details panel - A, R, D, M and LNR + Adjustment brush if necessary.
>Save

7. Then I open the Tif in PS for any further enhancements and/or printing


I just quickly joined them side by side (attached) hope it works/illustrates
Love to hear what others have to say about this.

[Dave Ellis]

Dave. Wow what a difference !
Not only the halo around the rectangle, but also the rest of the frame is pretty free of artifacts too.

So in the first instance you capture sharpened the original file in ACR and upsized it 100%.
In the second instance  you just upsized it 100%. Saved it as Tif and re-opened it in ACR and capture sharpened it
Is this correct?

I just quickly joined them side by side (attached) hope it works/illustrates
Love to hear what others have to say about this.

Yes that's correct Frank. I should also point out that that capture sharpening settings had Detail set to 75% and Masking set to zero. If you reduce detail to zero, the results are nowhere near as dramatic but there is still a noticeable difference. The attachements show the comparison for zero Detail. The first is for capture sharpening before upsizing and the second for capture sharpening after upsizing (same settings of Amount 150 and Radius 1.5)

Dave

[Dave Ellis]

Would the workflow look like this:
1. ACR> Basic Panel - WB, Exp, Con, Blacks, Whites, Highlights, Shadows, Clarity, Vibrance

2. ACR> Workflow Options dialog - Image resizing> check resize box (enter the new up-res size) >click OK

3. ACR> Save image > Tif

4. ACR> Workflow Options dialog – uncheck the resize box to keep raw master at original size for future use [Optional step]
>Done

5. Re-open saved Tif in ACR

6. Capture Sharpen > ACR Details panel - A, R, D, M and LNR + Adjustment brush if necessary.
>Save

7. Then I open the Tif in PS for any further enhancements and/or printing

Frank just noticed that you added these extra comments. That is basically the procedure I followed but it was for test purposes only. I wasn't specifically suggesting this as your normal workflow. I don't have the expertise to advise on that.

Dave

[FrankG]

From what i've read, it's good and recommended,  to keep the Detail slider up high if one can do so without introducing too many artifacts. So you 'home-brew' method may be advisable?
Let's see if anyone with tons of knowledge/experience comment on this workflow.
Bart, jeff Schewe, Rodney et al ?