Focus or not

[Jonathan Wienke]

I second the recommendation of Focus Magic. It's a very effective sharpening tool.

[Mark D Segal]

Jonathan, thanks for the idea but I've been using PK Sharpener Pro since it hit the market. It is truly by far and away the best sharpening package I have used from amongst Photoshop USM, Focal Blade and NIK. My query was about anyone else's comparative experience between PK and Focus Magic as I have not tried the latter. If FM provides a demo maybe I should give it a whirl, just out of curiosity.

[Jonathan Wienke]

For 1Ds and 1D-MkII images, I typically convert the RAW in ACR, run Neat Image if necessary, and then do a Focus Magic pass with radius 2-3 and intensity between 75 and 125%. I'm not real impressed with the auto setting detector; it can be fooled if you have OOF clouds in a landscape shot, it will suggest a ridiculous radius setting like 7 or 10 sometimes under such conditions. Instead, I tell it what I want, it dutifully complies, and all is well.

[RobertJ]

Mark, I see that on some areas of a file, it really does add that little extra sharpening that is lost, and I may start using it on some images, but so far, I don't like how it works on images that have a main subject, and a nice bokeh/background blur, since it really targets the blur, and adds a wee bit of noise.  Of course, I can always use the eraser and delete it.  (Thank you PK for using layers).  In other words, although I know it's supposed to be a subtle effect, I also feel that it doesn't add enough significant sharpening to the main subject, but instead, messes up my clean backgrounds/bokeh.  But I'm still experimenting.

[Morris]

Hi every one. I just bought my canon eos 20d and I am now doing alot of exposuretests and focustests and all other things you want to know when you buy a new camera. Everything seems really brilliant except..... are the pictures really sharp? And how sharp can I espect them to be? I just did a test with an object that is not moving, with the camera on a tripod - different shutterspeeds and you know, just many different ways to take it. I shoot in raw format and uses camera raw in PS. Lets put it like this, they are sharp but not knifesharp. When I use the sharpening tool in camera raw you can clearly see a difference. I heard that focusproblems can be an issue with digitalcameras and that you can send it back if you have that problems, and get it fixed. Anyone with a 20d that can give me some advice of what to espect - do you get knifesharp pictures in rawformat or is it meant that you have to get that extra sharpeness in camera raw? Help!

[Tim Gray]

Assuming good support techniques, sharpness is probably more of a factor of the lens than the body/sensor and you didn't mention what lens you are using and if a zoom, what focal length or what f stop - f8 is a reasonable "sweet spot" - the higher f stops won't likely appear as sharp.

You can test for front/back focus problems by putting a yardstick or tape measure on a table and with the camera back from the table, on a tripod, using your widest aperture, focus on a specific mark and see if that's more or less in the centre of the part of the ruler that's in focus on your monitor.  If what's in focus is not where you did focus you have a callibration issue that may need servicing.

I use Focus Magic as my "capture sharpener" - you can download a demo from http://www.focusmagic.com/   Try the demo - it will give you a pixel measure of amount of focus blur that it finds.  I can regularly get a one pixel amount (and often 0) using good hand-holding technique with a 1DMKII and the 24-70 2.8 or 70-200 2.8 at ranges of between f 5.6 and f 16.   Focus Magic probably isn't the be all and end all test, but it does give me a some consistent range of objectivity as I process my shots.  If I get a 4 or 5 then I know I've screwed up and don't even bother to work up the shot.

[Mark D Segal]

How does it compare with PK Sharpener Pro?

[Morris]

Thank you all. I use efs 17-84 image stabilizer, with a skylight on. I tried both zooming in on object and with wide. I will trie the test you suggested because I have a feeling that the focus ends up just a little bit behind where I put the focuspoint. If so, can I then send the camera in for service?
Thank you for the advice on the sharpeningtool, I will trie that. And again, Im amazed by all kind people on this site that are willing to take their time and help others with their problems!

[Tim Gray]

I used PK Sharpener (and still do for output and creative sharpening) but prefer Focus Magic for capture.  I like the way it sharpens, at moderate levels halos are not a problem and I like the way I get specific feedback on exactly how much sharpening is being recommended - and I can have it sample different areas of the shot for comparison.  It's always a fine balance between edge artifacts and exacerbating noise, but FM seem to give me a more precise sense of control.

[Jonathan Wienke]

Jonathan, thanks for the idea but I've been using PK Sharpener Pro since it hit the market. .

I was referring to Focus Magic's free demo. Then you can compare for yourself.

[Mark D Segal]

Tim and Jonathan,

I have now succeeded in downloading FocusMagic and trying it. Unless I am missing something - please advise - I do not think it is a substitute for PK Capture Sharpener. PK restores acutance lost from digital processing (e.g. digital capture or scanning). Focus Magic looks for out of focus material and corrects it. These are different issues. I tried Focus Magic on an image that is not out of focus, but needed some acutance improvement as a result of scanning and noise reduction. It didn't detect anything as out of focus (which was correct), and therefore didn't shapen anything and didn't improve acutance. Now perhaps I could fool it by setting a pixel width and an amount and letting it operate, but that to me seems a more haphazard approach than what I can do with PK Capture Sharpener for dealing with post-capture acutance improvement. Just my initial impressions. Any comment?

[RobertJ]

I don't use the PK Capture Sharpener.  On my 20D files, it just seems to add a lot of unnecessary noise/muck, that may or may not improve the image - 99 percent of the time, it doesn't improve it, it makes it look worse.

In Capture One, I don't have "sharpening disabled on output" checked.  I leave it on, and use the "Standard" look, with everything set to "0."  So, I guess that's MY "capture" sharpening, and then I use PK for creative.  I'm sure a lot of people will disagree, but how many people have the same workflow?

[Mark D Segal]

Interesting, like so many of these threads this one is turning out to be fun indeed - not because any of us are jokers - but because in this digital imaging business different peoples' experience with apparently the same things can be so varied. I say this because I read Tim saying the effect of PK is too subtle, whereas T-1000 finds it adds alot of noice and muck. (T-1000 are you saying this about the monitor image or the print, because the former is not necessarily a reliable guide to the latter; images that look somewhat artifcated on the monitor often emerge as superb prints - this is a well-known phenominon.) Tim and Jonathan agree that Focus Magic should be used manually - and from what I saw last night I agree - with some working experience one would get a feel for how to adjust it and you guys have clearly done so.

Tim - your experience about PK Capture sharpen being subtle mirrors mine. It is intended that way - but I should mention - it is less subtle when applied to a color negative scan that has been de-grained with Neat Image than it is with a Canon 1Ds file. PK sharpening is a cumulative two or three stage process, where each stage adds a little to produce a very pleasing final result. In the final analysis, I think each of these tools has its own comparative advantage.

[Mark D Segal]

Enjoy experimenting - you can tweak it alot - both the options and the opacities of the various layers. Actually it does not target blur. It targets edges, and it seeks finer and finer edges as you go from wide edge to super fine edge sharpen. What appears like bits of white noise on an expanded monitor image does not show up in the print. When you examine PK-sharpened images on your monitor - especially if you are using a CRT, it is also important to set the magnification in the Photoshop navigation window at 50%, because at 50% you get the clearest screen rendition possible of what it is doing (this is a technical issue about how image pixels get rendered as screen pixels at various magnification factors). 25% also works well, but the magnification is sometimes a bit low to optimally see what is happening. Most important, only come to conclusions about the results of your experiments by looking at prints, not the monitor image. Takes more time and materials, but it is the ONLY reliable way of really understanding what it does under what settings.

[lester_wareham]

Anyone with a 20d that can give me some advice of what to espect - do you get knifesharp pictures in rawformat or is it meant that you have to get that extra sharpeness in camera raw? Help!

Most forms of digital capture have what is called an anti-alias filter to prevent aliasing problems. These filters are often called blur filters because they effectivly soften the image.

So it is normally to provide some modest sharpening to overcome this. This is known as capture sharpening. So a little softness might be expected without sharpening.

I would say my 20D is as sharp and probably sharper than my 35mm film cameras and I was a reluctant convert to digital.

Things to check:

Are you using mirror lockup in your tests to minimise vibration?

If you are focussing close with a limited aperture zoom the focus accuracy might not be as exact as it could be.

Use f8-f11 for optimal sharpness, or 3 stops down from maximum aperture for faster lenses.

Make sure the target is flat, newspaper type is a good one and the camaer square.


Good Luck

[Jonathan Wienke]

I've not used PK. Try the free demo...

[Mark D Segal]

Sorry for the trouble Jonathan - I misunderstood - anyhow between our two posts I did go to the Focus Magic website, downloaded their demo, and when I clicked on the "exe" file it froze my computer, so I had to shut-down, re-start, delete the program and will probably go back for a fresh start. Sometimes these things happen once and then there is smooth sailing thereafter!

[Tim Gray]

Tim and Jonathan,

I have now succeeded in downloading FocusMagic and trying it. Unless I am missing something - please advise - I do not think it is a substitute for PK Capture Sharpener. PK restores acutance lost from digital processing (e.g. digital capture or scanning). Focus Magic looks for out of focus material and corrects it. These are different issues. I tried Focus Magic on an image that is not out of focus, but needed some acutance improvement as a result of scanning and noise reduction. It didn't detect anything as out of focus (which was correct), and therefore didn't shapen anything and didn't improve acutance. Now perhaps I could fool it by setting a pixel width and an amount and letting it operate, but that to me seems a more haphazard approach than what I can do with PK Capture Sharpener for dealing with post-capture acutance improvement. Just my initial impressions. Any comment?

Mark, my use is the same as Jonathan's - I don't let it choose it's own area to base processing on - I choose and area that I know should be sharp and use that - ideally should be 1 or 2 pixels only.  The effect of the PK capture sharpening is a bit too subtle for me.

[RobertJ]

Okay Mark, after doing a little more experimenting, I've concluded that PK capture sharpening contributes significant sharpening to the image, and helps out a lot with fine detail, (like on a pine tree in this one image I had) especially when I use the super-fine edge.  I retract my statements that PK Capture Sharpener is crap.  

[Mark D Segal]

Good work - now you have one more useful tool in your arsenal. It's one of those programs whose qualities grow on you with continued use under a broad range of conditions.