Sharpen before noise reduction?

[texshooter]

I heard Vince Versace say one should sharpen before noise reduction. I thought it was the other way.  Is this true? Can someone explain. I'm not convinced yet.


Youtube clip

[digitaldog]

I heard Vince Versace say one should sharpen before noise reduction. I thought it was the other way.  Is this true? Can someone explain. I'm not convinced yet.
Youtube clip

Vinny is a great guy but no, that isn't the general consensus whatsoever.
https://www.adobepress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1394317&seqNum=2

Always do noise reduction before sharpening unless the sharpening and noise reduction are integrated in the same processing pipeline. If you sharpen first separately, you’ll almost certainly make the noise worse. The noise-reduction tool will have to work harder, and will probably wipe out the sharpening you did anyway.

[texshooter]

Vince also says he sets his screen resolution to 100 ppi.

I thought it was best to set the screen resolution to the screen's native resolution, which could be more or less than 100. Setting the screen resolution to something other than its native ppi causes rounding errors and will not give you the sharpest possible image on screen. Am I wrong?

Youtube clip

[digitaldog]

Vince also says he sets his screen resolution to 100 ppi.

As stated, that makes no sense. Set where Photoshop? That would have zero to do with any of this. It only affects the "Print Size" View option there. And no, you don't just set 100 PPI there, you set based on your display.
Measure the width of your display and divide that by the number of pixels it's displaying.
For example, on my NEC 3090, the width is 25.25 inches. Its resolution is 2560x1690. 2560/25.25=101.4 PPI.
On my NEC PA271Q, the width is 23.5 inches. Its resolution is 2560x1440. 2560/23.5=109PPI.
Do you want to view the image on-screen the most accurately? You set it to 100% (1:1) or greater so there isn't any subsampling when zooming out. Not that sharpening visually makes any sense for a print. Vinney is confused or the translation is; 
http://creativepro.com/out-of-gamut-thoughts-a-sharpening-workflow/

[texshooter]

So the screen resolution setting (in PS>Preferences>New document preset resolutions) should be the same as the screen's native resolution? This will make sure that when viewing a document in PS zoomed in to 100%, the PPI of the document matches the PPI of the screen (whilst zoomed to 100%). This ensures a pixel to pixel match for critical sharpening. 

Did I say this right?  Maybe Vince's screen just so happens to be 100ppi natively, so that's why he sets his new document resolution to the same.

[digitaldog]

So the screen resolution setting (in PS>Preferences>New document preset resolutions) should be the same as the screen's native resolution?

All this does is affect the size of the image based on that view option.
I don't know what you mean by screen's native resolution.
I do know that you want to view one image pixel with one display pixel for the most accurate preview (100% or 1:1 depending on the software) or greater. NOT zoomed out which subsamples the preview to zoom out. And again, sharpening for output visually doesn't work. Capture and creative sharpening, fine.
I've known Vinney for decades, I can tell you I can't get into his head and often can't understand him. I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying I can't understand him from time to time.

[texshooter]

I'm not saying he's wrong, I'm saying I can't understand him from time to time.

(When I say native screen resolution I mean exactly how you calculated it in your aforementioned examples.)

I tried to understand Vince's reason for sharpening before noise reduction but he didn't elaborate enough for me to see where he is coming from. So I'll stick with convention for now. Thanks

[texshooter]

For example, on my NEC 3090, the width is 25.25 inches. Its resolution is 2560x1690. 2560/25.25=101.4 PPI.
On my NEC PA271Q, the width is 23.5 inches. Its resolution is 2560x1440. 2560/23.5=109PPI.

Update:  I calculated my screen's resolution this way and came up with 101.4 ppi.  So I went ahead and typed that number into Photoshop's screen resolution setting in Preferences. Here's the problem that ensued. After setting Preferences to 101.4 ppi I opened an image (any will do) and selected View>Print Size and studied the size of the image on the screen. Then I selected View>Actual Size and noticed the size changed slightly. I was expecting View>Print Size to be identical to View>Actual Size but no such luck.  Then I changed the  screen resolution in Preferences to 100 ppi (like Vince suggested) to see what would happen. Guess what, the View>Print Size version appeared identical to the View>Actual Size version.  My deduction: measuring my screen's ppi with a ruler or trusting the manual's specs doesn't work. 

[digitaldog]

I was expecting View>Print Size to be identical to View>Actual Size but no such luck.

Actual size and Print size are not the same (otherwise why two such options).

[texshooter]

Actual size and Print size are not the same (otherwise why two such options).

Clarification:  Print Size uses your Preferences>Units & Rulers>Screen Resolution setting. If that setting is the same as your main monitor’s native resolution, Actual Size and Print Size should be the same.  But they weren't in my case, probably because the manufacturer's reported screen resolution is a lie.

[digitaldog]

Clarification:  Print Size uses your Preferences>Units & Rulers>Screen Resolution setting.

Yes.

If that setting is the same as your main monitor’s native resolution, Actual Size and Print Size should be the same. 

Again, I don't know what you mean by "Native Resolution". I'm on a Mac maybe that's a difference. I can set my Display to many different resolutions. Then I use the technique outlined with the math to produce the value to pop into Photoshop's preferences.

But they weren't in my case, probably because the manufacturer's reported screen resolution is a lie.

Again, it isn't a lie on this end. I simply view in Monitors what the display IS producing. And I can get 1:1 previews (one pixel for one screen pixel).

[texshooter]

Update: I did some more digging. It turns out there is a bug with the View>Actual Size feature for Windows users only. So I simply will ignore the View Actual Size and rely on View Print Size instead. I love simple endings.

[digitaldog]

Update: I did some more digging. It turns out there is a bug with the View>Actual Size feature for Windows users only. So I simply will ignore the View Actual Size and rely on View Print Size instead. I love simple endings.

Or better, happy endings 😱