Sharpening : In-camera or Post-Processing?

01/12/2006 02:08:22 AM · #1

I realize that one thing which I use in most of my photogpaphs is "Sharpening". Maybe its because my PnS camera does not give "crisp" pictures. But there is option within camera for sharpening the picture while clicking it but I read somewhere that it better to sharpen during post-processing. But sharpening during post processing adds lots of noise.

Please suggest whats better - sharpening in camera or during post-processing? or any tips around 'sharpening'.

01/12/2006 02:14:26 AM · #2

It's MUCH better to sharpen in PP than in camera. The in-camera algorithms for sharpening are pretty much fixed, so it's "one size fits all". In PP you can sharpen in many different ways and too different degrees, to optimize each image individually.

This may not be an issue in normal, average lighting, but it can be a HUGE issue in contrasty scenes, to name one example. If you are doing a lot of pictures of an event or something, and the lighting is good, in-camera may work fine for you and lessen your workload dramatically in PP, but for "serious" images do it in PP.

Before I started shooting RAW, I set my P&S to low contrast, low color saturation, no sharpening as my default and did all that stuff in photoshop.

Robt.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/12/2006 02:15:26 AM · #3

Maybe you are sharpening too much, if it is giving you noise.

I would not recommend sharpening in the camera, unless you have a very controlled environment and a measured expectation of the result. Once it's gone, it's gone. If you sharpen in a post process workflow, you can adjust it as needed. If it's already done, you lose an option and have less control over the finished work.

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/12/2006 02:16:54 AM · #4

if you think of the post processing power of the camera, and compare that with your computer, the computer has alot more recources to throw at the problem. It allows you to try several different approaches to sharpening and see which one you like best.

i like to shoot in RAW and keep that shot stored unedited as a digital negative, and work on copies, why risk doing something that messes up your capture.

01/12/2006 02:18:27 AM · #5

Thanks! But I dont have option of shooting in RAW but I do have option of using "flat" setting by making sharpness, contrast and saturation to "zero".

Bear/Gringo/Brennan - would you be able to help me give tips on how to sharpen in photoshop? There are three parameters to be played with ... but I dont really understand their roles and how it impacts sharpening.

Message edited by author 2006-01-12 02:19:13.

01/12/2006 02:20:34 AM · #6

Another example:
I will often split to RGB and sharpen only one of the three and reassemble them. You can't do adjustments like that in the camera yet.

01/12/2006 02:22:28 AM · #7

Originally posted by Gringo:

Another example:
I will often split to RGB and sharpen only one of the three and reassemble them. You can't do adjustments like that in the camera yet.

How does that help? Sorry for my silly questions but I'm new to photoshop also and struggling to get comfortable with it. As of now I have been using kiddy software - picasa :)

01/12/2006 02:27:56 AM · #8

Originally posted by tejinder:

Originally posted by Gringo:
Another example:
I will often split to RGB and sharpen only one of the three and reassemble them. You can't do adjustments like that in the camera yet.

How does that help? Sorry for my silly questions but I'm new to photoshop also and struggling to get comfortable with it. As of now I have been using kiddy software - picasa :)

Hmmmm, How does it help?
Splitting to Red, Green and Blue gives me the ability to sharpen the dominant color and leave the other two alone. This keeps the majority of the shot crisp and doesn't oversharpen the highlights. This would be just one of many ways to keep detail in the sharpened areas.

01/12/2006 02:27:59 AM · #9

BTW, I DO have RAW mode in my camera but its too slow to be practically used. I click my pictures in SHQ mode (I guess SHQ means "super high quality"!).

01/12/2006 02:32:07 AM · #10

I never shoot RAW either. But I do shoot with the highest resolution I have available.

01/12/2006 02:32:27 AM · #11

Originally posted by tejinder:

Sharpening a single channel can help reduce the halo effect that comes from forced sharpening across all channels.

Here's a tutorial on USM: //www.dpchallenge.com/tutorial.php?TUTORIAL_ID=4

Here's a pretty good description of how USM works, the 3 components: //www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-usm.shtml

Here's a long thread on photoshop basics with 6 or 7 lessons buried within it; it may be of use to you. You can find the actual "lessons" easily in rapid-scroll because they have bold type interspersed: //www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=277413

Robt.

01/12/2006 02:40:27 AM · #12

I always use to crib that whenever I start a thread it gets lost without trace. But this one proved me wrong - I got all the information I needed, to start with, within 30 mins! :) Thanks to you all.

And one last request, though its not strictly related to this thread topic - Can you please have a look at pictures in my profile and let me know what areas I need to look at for improvement? I know for sure, sharpening was one area I needed to look at. I really want to meet my target of making money for SLR, within 2007, by selling my pictures. And for the same I need to learn ...learn FAST.

01/12/2006 02:49:35 AM · #13

From what little is visible of your work in the challenges, you do not appear to have a "sharpening problem" across the boards. In general your images are strong and dynamic, with a good sense of color and composition. May I suggest you take the plunge and become a paying member, so you can have a proper portfolio and you can post up your best "personal work" for our review?

I get the sense, from what I see, that if you're determined to earn a living at photography you have the talent to make it possible at some level. It takes more than talent, of course, but that's a start. Ante up your 25 bucks, dude, and become a regular; best investment you could make. It's just one less night at the bar or one less restaurant meal, or whatever, and it's paid for :-)

Robt.

01/12/2006 02:52:59 AM · #14

BTW, the reason your information-seeking threads get lost is because you're in India, and you're completely opposite from the majority of the active members time-zone wise. I'm a night-owl, so you caught me tonight, and I'm one of the ones that enjoys taking the time to help out (there are many of us of course) so it worked well. Anyway I'd suggest finding a way to get your posts up where the "day crowd" can see them; the "night crowd" seems, most of the time, to be less active in this sort of information-seeking thread.

And yes, I'm aware "day" and "night" in the above context are USA-centric :-)

Robt.

01/12/2006 02:54:31 AM · #15

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Thanks for encouraging comments, Bear! But 25$ transtales to 1100 Rupees in India (where I live) and it equivalent to 5 nights at bar...and almost equal to my one full day earning (after taxes) :) But for sure, I'm determined to get SLR and also membership on DPC...soon. Maybe I will make money for membership from stock photography. I already have 12$ on my dreamstime with around 19 pics from last few months.

01/12/2006 02:58:50 AM · #16

You have some great work in there Tejinder. These are a few I think are fantastic stand alone shots. (Good even without a challenge topic).

This one is awesome. I don't think I would change it at all.

I like this one too. It's a great image.

I think this is also a very powerful image.

And this is the one I will pick on a little, only because I see it as oversharpened. I think this would be a good one to process again and to play with the sharpen tools to learn them and improve on it some. This is one where I would split to RGB to keep from getting the halo outlines.

01/12/2006 03:00:40 AM · #17

Originally posted by tejinder:

Yikes! That does make it difficult...

R.

Zigomar

Fujifilm X100T

Lensbaby 2.0

01/15/2006 10:37:21 PM · #18

Many times i've read: FIRST resize, THEN sharpen!
What's the exact difference?

01/15/2006 11:09:29 PM · #19

Originally posted by Zigomar:

Many times i've read: FIRST resize, THEN sharpen!
What's the exact difference?

Sharpening basically increases contrast between pixels. The number of pixels physically changes in a downsized image. Since a byproduct of sharpening is often to introduce edge artifacts into the image, it usually makes more sense to sharpen at the chosen display size.

This is assuming you shoot in JPG in the first place, with in-camera sharpening of some degree enabled. If you shoot in RAW you'll usually want to introduce some sharpening at the RAW conversion stage, since there is none at all in a RAW image.

R.

01/19/2006 12:41:41 AM · #20

Somehow I have been getting relatively good results by using sharpening in NeatImage sharpening (in free version). Any comments on if this can be used over photoshop sharpening? This seems to be very EASY :)