DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Is the original better?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 25, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/18/2004 07:10:04 PM · #1
For the defining features challenge I finished 14th overall which turns out to be my second highest placing and im very pleased with that outcome. However the majority of the comments I received mentioned the fact that I went way to heavy on the sharpening which hindered my overall placing. I personally like the over sharpened effect for obvious reasons, but my question to all those people who thought otherwise, would the unsharpened photo do better then the heavily sharpened submitted photo?.

Original unsharpened
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25483/thumb/113872.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/25483/thumb/113872.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Submitted Heavily sharpened
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/265/thumb/111727.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/265/thumb/111727.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

I have looked at both and if I had to do it again I would have whent with the heavily sharpened photo again
10/18/2004 07:11:41 PM · #2
Personally....... I definitely prefer the original. On my crisp LCD display, the oversharpened version is *beyond* oversharpened.
10/18/2004 07:12:09 PM · #3
My vote is for the original -- the sharpened image is definitely over done.
10/18/2004 07:13:41 PM · #4
something between them probably, but closer to the original.
10/18/2004 07:16:59 PM · #5
I didn't vote on this challenge but think you got a decent score and great place with the 'overly' sharpened shot. I'd suggest somewhere in the middle but feel the brick wall in focus lets the shot down a little.

My grandad had wire like hair on his eybrows/ears and out of his nose - something I'm really looking forward to!
10/18/2004 07:20:13 PM · #6
I like the one you submitted better. Your post processing seems to highlight the defining feature that you were going for in the photo. I don't think the sharpening has made the image 'bad' at all. It is sharp but not over sharp IMO.
10/18/2004 07:24:18 PM · #7
I commented on the over sharpening because for me it distracted from the portrait and made me think about the post processing. In my view the post processing is allowed to help guide the viewer to see what you want them to see. But in the process they should not see the actual processing effect itself.

I would go for somewhere between the two. I'd aim to enhance the rough wiry hair without the sharpening being too visible.

John
10/18/2004 07:25:18 PM · #8
should try keeping the bricks unsharp...
i like the sharpened one better tho, since thats what you were going for.
10/18/2004 07:31:15 PM · #9
I'm with Kyebosh on this one. I thought during the challenge that the sharpening in the version you submitted was a bit distracting. It might be cool to select just the man and sharpen him a bit less than you did, though still significantly enough to really show those defining wrinkles and stubble.

I liked this shot a lot, BTW. I thought it was a really nice candid of a great subject.
10/18/2004 07:44:36 PM · #10
:-)

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 22:43:39.
10/18/2004 07:44:49 PM · #11
Great shot John! Personal preference for me is to not over sharpen. I'm with the group that thinks somewhere in the middle would be good. Enough sharpening to bring out the textures in his face (wrinkles, beard, etc) but not so much as to loose the softness underneath. But who wants to quibble over an excellent photo?
10/19/2004 09:47:08 AM · #12
Thanks everyone, I appreciate your comments.

deapee you did a good job I give you a 9 :)
10/19/2004 09:52:03 AM · #13
I think the original is just fine. The sharp one is too sharp. If you were going to sharpen it, maybe just a little more but not much at all. The original looks very real.
10/19/2004 09:53:14 AM · #14
What were the settings on the USM?

It seems the face is a little too speckled.

I think I would recommend a slightly higher threshold setting (maybe 4?) and a radius of around 1.6 at about 105% but I'm interested to see how much I'm talking out of my ass when you post the actual settings you used...

Edit: Yeah, deapee you did seem to get it just right...what were your settings? I'm determined to master USM!

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 09:54:16.
10/19/2004 10:29:21 AM · #15
In my opinion I would go no further than Amount: 50% Radius: .5 and Threshold: 0 using Unsharp Mask. More than that and it seems like he might have his finger in a light socket.
10/19/2004 10:32:16 AM · #16
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:

In my opinion I would go no further than Amount: 50% Radius: .5 and Threshold: 0 using Unsharp Mask. More than that and it seems like he might have his finger in a light socket.


A threshold of 0? So you would sharpen everything but at a low rate? I've still got a lot to learn about USM...it just seems that those settings wouldn't do a whole lot, Digital Quixote...but I look forward to standing corrected! ;0)

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 10:33:03.
10/19/2004 11:01:46 AM · #17
I guess I'm a minimalist when it comes to sharpening. I don't like to see sharpening artifacts. Maybe go to threshhold of 1 but in general keep it very subtle is my rule of thumb. When you start to see white artifacts along the wrinkles, it's too much for me. Remember, I am working off a copy of the original posted at the beginning of the thread. On a full res version, these may be too subtle.

Edit: Damn typos!

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 11:02:45.
10/19/2004 11:09:13 AM · #18
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:

I guess I'm a minimalist when it comes to sharpening. I don't like to see sharpening artifacts. Maybe go to threshhold of 1 but in general keep it very subtle is my rule of thumb. When you start to see white artifacts along the wrinkles, it's too much for me. Remember, I am working off a copy of the original posted at the beginning of the thread. On a full res version, these may be too subtle.

Edit: Damn typos!


...but a higher threshold means less of the image is sharpened. I'm generally a sharpening minimalist as well, which is why I generally sharpen at about 100%, radius of 1.4 - 1.8 but with a threshold of about 5 so only those areas with contrasted shade/colour are sharpened (for example, an objects edges against the background).

A higher threshold will give you more subtlety (from what I understand)...

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 11:09:58.
10/19/2004 11:20:29 AM · #19
Tried it your way and my way ... guess I'm still happier with mine. Probably a matter of personal preference. [joking] Check your monitor's calibration. [/joking] [tongue in cheek] Maybe my D70 just needs less than the Cannon. [/tongue in cheek]

Message edited by author 2004-10-19 11:21:48.
10/19/2004 11:35:43 AM · #20
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:

Tried it your way and my way ... guess I'm still happier with mine. Probably a matter of personal preference. [joking] Check your monitor's calibration. [/joking] [tongue in cheek] Maybe my D70 just needs less than the Cannon. [/tongue in cheek]


Yeah, I haven't tried it...I'm at work so I'm not sure how my numbers would actually look!

I just thought it was important to note that a higher threshold means less of the image is being sharpened...USM can be tricky, but it's not too bad now that I understand what the different settings mean.
10/19/2004 09:41:20 PM · #21
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

What were the settings on the USM?

It seems the face is a little too speckled.

I think I would recommend a slightly higher threshold setting (maybe 4?) and a radius of around 1.6 at about 105% but I'm interested to see how much I'm talking out of my ass when you post the actual settings you used...

Edit: Yeah, deapee you did seem to get it just right...what were your settings? I'm determined to master USM!


Sorry I cant remember
10/19/2004 09:52:46 PM · #22
I like the original better. Or you could have done a tiny bit of sharpening, but I prefer under to over sharpened. The original looks sharp enough to me anyway.
10/19/2004 10:41:40 PM · #23
Definitely the original. I would, in fact soften it, not sharpen.
10/19/2004 11:19:15 PM · #24
DEFINATELY the original...oversharpened hahaa, now his beard looks SO prickly and shiny!!!
10/19/2004 11:38:17 PM · #25
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I like the one you submitted better. Your post processing seems to highlight the defining feature that you were going for in the photo.

I agree! Placed side by side, I would pick the original. However, the original by itself lacks appeal, and I think it would have scored lower in the challenge.

A number of voters complained about over/underexpose on my highest ranked photograph, but there were similar photographs in the challenge without the excessive curves adjustment that scored lower.


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 01/16/2021 11:31:22 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 01/16/2021 11:31:22 PM EST.