Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: John Hollenberg on September 13, 2020, 06:02:39 pm
-
I did a quick test of various methods of Capture sharpening for landscape images as follows:
1) Started with an image shot handheld with Sony A7r2 and Canon 24-70 f4 L via metabones adapter
2) Image in Lightroom 9.4, applied Auto Settings
3) Set sharpening to 0 and exported image to TIFF
4) Made layers in Photoshop 2020 so I could click layers on and off to see subtle differences
My evaluation from worst to best at zoom level 100% in Photoshop:
5) Topaz Sharpen AI Sharpen mode with defaults
4) Topaz Sharpen AI Focus mode with defaults
3) Lightroom export to TIFF with sharpening set to default of 40
2) Focus Magic 5.0 with Fix Out of Focus Mode, blur width of 2
1) Topaz Sharpen AI Stabilize with defaults
Notes:
--Topaz Sharpen AI and Focus modes were worse than useless (in my sample of 1 image)
--Focus Magic was noticeably better than Lightroom and has been my preferred capture sharpening method when I wanted the very best
--Topaz Sharpen AI Stabilize was in another league. I noticed there was an increase in contrast in the shadows to bring out detail such that the blacks were darker and the light parts were lighter by L* about 4 compared to the Focus Magic and other versions. This was on top of Shadows set as +60 in Lightroom from Auto Settings. Looked very natural, not overdone. I looked hard for any halos and saw one or two tiny white lines on a rock next to a patch of snow that could be a halo was hard to tell. Didn't see it anywhere else.
For those who want to check for themselves here is a link to layered TIFF file of a section of the photo you can look at in Photoshop or similar (file is about 300 MB):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/07v9fixnkiyjw0b/Sharpen%20Comparison.tif?dl=0
Comments welcome. I am thinking about purchasing Topaz Sharpen AI as I was on the first day of a 30 days trial.
John
-
Additional Notes:
1) After investigation, no halos. The place I thought might be a halo was in the original.
2) Image was taken at 24 mm, f7.1, 1/250 second - the stabilize mode was the only one worthwhile, which is similar to what I had read in several other reviews. Screen grab from Lightroom attached.
-
I don't know: for me the Sharpen AI Stabilize seems oversharpened, for my liking.
What you often see with sharpening is that little detail gets relatively too much attention; I think that happens here: i see white along dark tree branches
At some point a photo gets too stacato- like a drawing.
But- maybe in print it works out fine.
-
But- maybe in print it works out fine.
Could be but this is a discussion of capture sharpening which while used for print, is used for everything and, the output sharpening is based upon it
The origin of the sharpening workflow:
http://creativepro.com/out-of-gamut-thoughts-a-sharpening-workflow/
-
I don't know: for me the Sharpen AI Stabilize seems oversharpened, for my liking.
What you often see with sharpening is that little detail gets relatively too much attention; I think that happens here: i see white along dark tree branches
At some point a photo gets too stacato- like a drawing.
But- maybe in print it works out fine.
Good point. I wondered about that too. I went back and dialed down the Sharpness in Topaz Sharpen AI to 38 instead of the default 50. When I tried 25 it wasn't as sharp as Focus Magic. For me, 38 is the sweet spot: a little sharper than Focus Magic, but not oversharpened for my taste. I added it to the TIFF. Link is here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/on5z287umeudlv4/Sharpen%20Comparison%202.tif?dl=0
-
Good point. I wondered about that too. I went back and dialed down the Sharpness in Topaz Sharpen AI to 38 instead of the default 50. When I tried 25 it wasn't as sharp as Focus Magic. For me, 38 is the sweet spot: a little sharper than Focus Magic, but not oversharpened for my taste. I added it to the TIFF. Link is here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/on5z287umeudlv4/Sharpen%20Comparison%202.tif?dl=0
My "default" in Stabilize is 33, sometimes dialed down to 25 and always on a new layer to utilize blend if's and blend modes.
-
Whenever I export from Lightroom a picture edited with sharpening I like, it asks if I want to sharpen again for screen, matte print or glossy print.
Do you need to use this additional sharpening or was the sharpening sufficient what was done during the editing? When do you use this additional sharpening?
-
Whenever I export from Lightroom a picture edited with sharpening I like, it asks if I want to sharpen again for screen, matte print or glossy print.
Do you need to use this additional sharpening or was the sharpening sufficient what was done during the editing? When do you use this additional sharpening?
That's output sharpening. Based on whatever pixel density ("resolution") you export, and to what kind of output device generically. The entire workflow is based on this:
http://creativepro.com/out-of-gamut-thoughts-a-sharpening-workflow/
-
That's output sharpening. Based on whatever pixel density ("resolution") you export, and to what kind of output device generically. The entire workflow is based on this:
http://creativepro.com/out-of-gamut-thoughts-a-sharpening-workflow/
OK I read it. Thanks. A couple for questions. In Lightroom, there are three outputs settings: screen, matte paper and glossy paper with low, standard, and high for each. Since I'm looking at my screen when I adjust, why do you need another one at the end (edit-when saving to screen)? After all, it's looking good on my screen at the end of my LR edits prior to Saving a file?
How do you know which of three amounts should be applied? low, standard, and high?
Which output should I select, if any, for offset printing like I would use with Blurb books?
-
Output sharpening in LR is not previewed.
-
Andrew: Thanks as always for the advanced level of technical info.
John: I agree with your assessment that in Topaz Sharpen AI, the Stabilize feature is the most useful, even on images where you would think Sharpen or Focus modes would work better (based on the problems inherent in the original).
John and anybody else: If you're interested in any Topaz product, don't pay full price (http://plugsandpixels.com/discounts.html). And if you catch Topaz during a product release special (such as they are having now with DeNoise) or during some holiday sale, you can stack the discounts.
-
Which output should I select, if any, for offset printing like I would use with Blurb books?
No output sharpening optimized for halftone output. So IF you must use LR, probably InkJet.
-
I did a quick test of various methods of Capture sharpening for landscape images as follows:
1) Started with an image shot handheld with Sony A7r2 and Canon 24-70 f4 L via metabones adapter
2) Image in Lightroom 9.4, applied Auto Settings
3) Set sharpening to 0 and exported image to TIFF
4) Made layers in Photoshop 2020 so I could click layers on and off to see subtle differences
My evaluation from worst to best at zoom level 100% in Photoshop:
5) Topaz Sharpen AI Sharpen mode with defaults
4) Topaz Sharpen AI Focus mode with defaults
3) Lightroom export to TIFF with sharpening set to default of 40
2) Focus Magic 5.0 with Fix Out of Focus Mode, blur width of 2
1) Topaz Sharpen AI Stabilize with defaults
Notes:
--Topaz Sharpen AI and Focus modes were worse than useless (in my sample of 1 image)
--Focus Magic was noticeably better than Lightroom and has been my preferred capture sharpening method when I wanted the very best
--Topaz Sharpen AI Stabilize was in another league. I noticed there was an increase in contrast in the shadows to bring out detail such that the blacks were darker and the light parts were lighter by L* about 4 compared to the Focus Magic and other versions. This was on top of Shadows set as +60 in Lightroom from Auto Settings. Looked very natural, not overdone. I looked hard for any halos and saw one or two tiny white lines on a rock next to a patch of snow that could be a halo was hard to tell. Didn't see it anywhere else.
For those who want to check for themselves here is a link to layered TIFF file of a section of the photo you can look at in Photoshop or similar (file is about 300 MB):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/07v9fixnkiyjw0b/Sharpen%20Comparison.tif?dl=0
Comments welcome. I am thinking about purchasing Topaz Sharpen AI as I was on the first day of a 30 days trial.
John
Your experience is completely consistent with mine, having used Focus Magic for many years and now Topaz Sharpen AI for a couple of years. FM is still quite good, but Sharpen AI in Stabilize Mode is even better. The other Modes, Sharpen and Focus, have never given me a better result and I always use the Stabilize Mode. Strangely, when Sharpen AI first was released, the Sharpen Mode was the default. In an update within the past x number of months, Stabilize became the default Mode.
-
I did a quick test of various methods of Capture sharpening for landscape images as follows:
1) Started with an image shot handheld with Sony A7r2 and Canon 24-70 f4 L via metabones adapter
John
Shooting handheld with no stabilization is a condition where the stabilize mode in Topaz Sharpen AI would be effective. It would be interesting to do tests with a hand held stabilized lens or with the camera on a sturdy tripod.
Bill
-
Shooting handheld with no stabilization is a condition where the stabilize mode in Topaz Sharpen AI would be effective. It would be interesting to do tests with a hand held stabilized lens or with the camera on a sturdy tripod.
Correct, but there may also be other reasons why the 'Stabilize' model does so well in many cases.
It is capable of addressing/removing some of the local subject movement (people in streets, swaying branches/grass/leaves) because its sharpening is spatially variant. It can also be that lens distortion correction produces local unsharpness due to interpolation (besides the fact that corners are usually softer than the center of the image). That's why TopazLabs have made the Stabilize AI model the default, because usage data showed that it was chosen by most users as the preferred AI model.
-
I still have problems w.r.t. the repeatability on results over different images, especially on artifacts that present themselves as very unnatural in the image. I have no interest in long time tailoring each and every individual image settings and I’m way off finding something going in the direction of ‘one setting fits all’.
In this respect FocusMagic gives me best results.
Cheers,
Jaap.
-
I am somewhat confused with this thread. I use ACR and Photoshop in my work - no LR. I do a basic general sharpening in ACR first on the raw file that I understood to be what is termed as Capture sharpening. Then on to Photoshop where I do a second more localized creative sharpening usually at the end of various tonal modifications, mostly using high pass of various radii. Which one of these 2 sharpening steps is applicable to the discussion at hand here? When I look at the various image layers in OP's first post, it seems in addition to sharpening there also is a lot of what I would think is more akin to Clarity in ACR. Then there is Enhance Details as well in ACR that I have yet to explore. How would they compare when taken in together to the various third party solutions being discussed here.
:Niranjan.
-
Sharpening in LR and ACR are the same. They can both do Capture and (limited) output sharpening.
-
Speaking of ACR, I just opened the new updated version (13) for the first time. Everything's changed. Looks more like LR as ever. Sharpening has become more "simplified." Just one knob - Details. No Radius control, no Masking. Enhance Details is gone too, it seems - unless it is buried somewhere I can't find (Edit: I found it.) Bunch of other stuff taken away too, like various noise control options. I wonder how that would affect the old files when you open in the new version.
-
Speaking of ACR, I just opened the new updated version (13) for the first time. Everything's changed. Looks more like LR as ever.
Absolutely nothing has changed with respect to sharpening in the new version of ACR; the interface has. And no, you haven't found the other tools that drop down like exposed in the past. You need to LEARN what's new and how to use the new GUI:
https://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2020/06/acrv12-3.html
-
Absolutely nothing has changed with respect to sharpening in the new version of ACR; the interface has. And no, you haven't found the other tools that drop down like exposed in the past. You need to LEARN what's new and how to use the new GUI:
https://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2020/06/acrv12-3.html
I know I have to learn - I hate to do that. That's why I don't update right away. When I said "changed" I meant more the look and layout. Not necessary the content. After I (re)learn, I am sure sure I will find a few new things that I like. I skipped a few generations, so my impression of change is probably exaggerated
-
Absolutely nothing has changed with respect to sharpening in the new version of ACR; the interface has. And no, you haven't found the other tools that drop down like exposed in the past. You need to LEARN what's new and how to use the new GUI:
https://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2020/06/acrv12-3.html
There are still the extra controls in sharpening and noise reduction. There is a little arrow to the right of the word sharpening & noise reduction.
Click on the arrows and more sliders will appear with those extra controls.
-
There are still the extra controls in sharpening and noise reduction. There is a little arrow to the right of the word sharpening & noise reduction.
Click on the arrows and more sliders will appear with those extra controls.
Thanks Bernard...that's it. It's all there. They messed me up by putting the arrow on the right side when I am used to see it on the left side.
-
Absolutely nothing has changed with respect to sharpening in the new version of ACR; the interface has. And no, you haven't found the other tools that drop down like exposed in the past. You need to LEARN what's new and how to use the new GUI:
https://blogs.adobe.com/jkost/2020/06/acrv12-3.html
Thanks for the link.