ACR/PS vs Lightroom - visual Sharpening

[Bill Carr]

First the concern, then the question:

I think I understand now that LR is parametric and during Develop processing presents an approximation of what it will look like when it is finally cooked/rendered/baked in at export/printing, we are not seeing the pixel level results of our work in LR.  This seems fine for all the Develop functions, with my perceived exception of the detail panel. 

I shoot grizzlies, wolves and red foxes, among other things, at a hundred yards or more in Yellowstone (it's the law)

The very fine hairs (high frequency?) on these animal seem to stretch the capabilities of measly 16-18 MP sensors, and I constantly wonder if there are hairs per pixels or pixels per hair.  This is not a problem with birds or veins on leaves, which is what I was shooting when I started with LR 1.

This brings me back to Sharpening.  I read with great interest, pleasure, and appreciation the thread involving Jeff Schewe and others about manipulating the different sliders to get the best results.  My concern is with whether the parametric model is sufficient for such fine sharpening work.

Question(s):

Should I be using PS for this intricate work so that I can see the actual affect on the pixels to make my decisions about sharpening?

Or does LR do a good enough job of approximating the result that I should not be concerned?

Should it depend on the individual image?  Am I answering my own question?

Thanks in advance.

[stamper]

In PS you can use layers to fine tune the sharpening and pixel peep in a better fashion. If you know how to use PS reasonably well then - imo - it would be the road to go down.

>I shoot grizzlies, wolves and red foxes, among other things, at a hundred yards or more in Yellowstone (it's the law) Wink<

I think you could rephrase that comment or the animal lovers will be venting their fury?

[John R Smith]

I think I understand now that LR is parametric and during Develop processing presents an approximation of what it will look like when it is finally cooked/rendered/baked in at export/printing, we are not seeing the pixel level results of our work in LR.

Bill

As I understand it, capture sharpening in LR (your Detail panel) renders to the screen as pixels - of course, it has to. If you zoom in to 4x or 8x you can see them, just as you can in PS. And these pixels are exactly the same ones which will be exported to your final TIFF if you apply no further sharpening. The Develop Module is not an approximation of the end result, as long as you export at 16 bit.

John

[eliedinur]

Bill

As I understand it, capture sharpening in LR (your Detail panel) renders to the screen as pixels - of course, it has to. If you zoom in to 4x or 8x you can see them, just as you can in PS. And these pixels are exactly the same ones which will be exported to your final TIFF if you apply no further sharpening. The Develop Module is not an approximation of the end result, as long as you export at 16 bit.

John

Yes, I agree. I think too much is made of the difference between "parametric" and "pixel". You are always operating on display pixels, in any application. The only difference is that in the pixel editor the changes you make to the display pixels are made in parallel and immediately to the image pixels (unless you are using layers) while in LR the alterations to the original data are delayed and then made on a whole new set of image pixels generated for that purpose.

[Schewe]

Should I be using PS for this intricate work so that I can see the actual affect on the pixels to make my decisions about sharpening?

Or does LR do a good enough job of approximating the result that I should not be concerned?

Should it depend on the individual image?  Am I answering my own question?

You are kinda answering your own question except for the fact you are missing the boat regarding a complete sharpening workflow. ACR/LR is designed to product optimal "capture sharpening" which is needed for regaining the apparent sharpness lost at the point of capture. Capture sharpening depends on the source of the image; the type & size of capture and the content (the type of edge frequency the image has. Capture sharpening is NOT designed to do sharpening for effect. That falls under the heading of creative sharpening which is usually done locally. ACR/LR has rudimentary (but useful) creative sharpening but Photoshop has the potential for doing a lot more.

Assuming you've done the proper capture and creative sharpening, the last stage, output sharpening takes care of the sharpening lost due to output (either on paper or on a display).

So, capture sharpen in ACR/LR to get an optimal image, creative sharpen in Photoshop for effect then output sharpen in LR (or Photoshop with the proper tools) and you'll get the best your images can give you. And yes, super high frequency image detail such as hairs, fur or feather is a challenge. More resolution in the capture or better photographic techniques (like using fast shutter speeds or a tripod) can help there...