Since it seems that my post on sharper images has received quite a bit of response, I've put together a tutorial / test of seven different sharpening methods and tools including what I've already talked about as well as nik Sharpener Pro, and Ultra-Sharpen 5 Pro. If Silverfast is capable of doing better, I'd like to hear about it so I can revise my review!
http://www.webdextrous.com/tutorials/sharpest.htm
PS Rest of site still Under Construction
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ianders1 on 2001-10-09 09:58 ]</font>
Sharpening Techniques Showdown
Moderator: LSI_Ketelhohn
Yipes...
Ian... just looked at your site with sharpening tests and results.
You appear to be comparing apples and oranges.
Sharpening rule of thumb is to sharpen an image only after it is resampled to final size.
In the Nik Sharpener panel it appears you have tried inkjet auto scan and offset auto scan on a 72 ppi image. No wonder it fell apart. The internet autoscan actually looks pretty good. You have to realize that that internet image is going to be softened again when it is compressed.
In the methods you favor, you are actually applying your own logic to the shapening settings... and yipes again... some of your settings are contrary to common sharpening practice.
In conclusion.. Your quest for the best way to sharpen images is a worthy one.. but your test is flawed.
I'm working on a photo exhibition this week and scanning and printing my head off. I can't jump in and add to this discussion as I would like to, but let's keep it going.
Junebug
ps. to Ian.. bug me about this next week and I'll post the best methods I know about and am using. Jb.
Ian... just looked at your site with sharpening tests and results.
You appear to be comparing apples and oranges.
Sharpening rule of thumb is to sharpen an image only after it is resampled to final size.
In the Nik Sharpener panel it appears you have tried inkjet auto scan and offset auto scan on a 72 ppi image. No wonder it fell apart. The internet autoscan actually looks pretty good. You have to realize that that internet image is going to be softened again when it is compressed.
In the methods you favor, you are actually applying your own logic to the shapening settings... and yipes again... some of your settings are contrary to common sharpening practice.
In conclusion.. Your quest for the best way to sharpen images is a worthy one.. but your test is flawed.
I'm working on a photo exhibition this week and scanning and printing my head off. I can't jump in and add to this discussion as I would like to, but let's keep it going.
Junebug
ps. to Ian.. bug me about this next week and I'll post the best methods I know about and am using. Jb.
Junebug Clark / detroit
http://www.MooreClark.com
http://www.MooreClark.com
-
ianders1
- SilverFast Professional
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:00 am
- Location: Jacksonville, FL
- Contact:
Junebug,
I think you missed the point of what I was doing. In response:
On 2001-10-09 14:24, Junebug wrote:
"Yipes...
Ian... just looked at your site with sharpening tests and results.
You appear to be comparing apples and oranges."
If you look at the results, you'll see a huge difference among the results.
"Sharpening rule of thumb is to sharpen an image only after it is resampled to final size."
I am aware of this rule, but I did not want to do any resampling - this modifies the image. And as far as sharpening at the final resolution (e.g. 300 or 360dpi) PhotoShop only sees pixels, not dpi, so whether it be 1600 or 300dpi, it's still the same number of pixels.
Also, not everyone prints out their scans, and these techniques apply to any method of delivery whether it be offset, inkjet, web, etc. I was simply searching for the best method. It's up to you, the user to determine how much to sharpen, based on your output.
"In the Nik Sharpener panel it appears you have tried inkjet auto scan and offset auto scan on a 72 ppi image. No wonder it fell apart. The internet autoscan actually looks pretty good. You have to realize that that internet image is going to be softened again when it is compressed."
If you had read my note, you'd see that I was trying for the best image possible, and that's why I used the Internet Autoscan. I went back and changed it to Inkjet, which achieved even more dire results. As for the 72 dpi issue, that's what nik Sharpener Pro automatically sets itself too. If you look at the screencap now, you'll see it says "Warning! Extremely High DPI" since it's the 1600dpi I've been working with.
"In the methods you favor, you are actually applying your own logic to the shapening settings... and yipes again... some of your settings are contrary to common sharpening practice."
If you're referring to my logic when applying the radius settings, I never claimed it to be scientific, but over the years,I've worked with various experts who've told me that for most scans under 300 dpi you should use around 0.8 - 1.2, and 1600dpi and beyond, 1.6-3.0 work best. You'll see these facts corroborated on almost any forum or expert's site. As for the "Hard Light Method" I've always found that a Radius of 10.0 is too large, even though it's commonly held to be the one and only setting. Check some other sources on this method, and most of them say you shouldn't exceed a radius of 5
"In conclusion.. Your quest for the best way to sharpen images is a worthy one.. but your test is flawed."
Why is my test flawed? I was trying to test for the best method to sharpen a file in PhotoShop, period. I applied logic to the quality of the results. The best methods allowed the most control over the appearance of the final image, and did not produce any obvious artifacts. Both Ultra-Sharpen and the Schewe technique are also non-destructive, in case your output needs change.
"I'm working on a photo exhibition this week and scanning and printing my head off. I can't jump in and add to this discussion as I would like to, but let's keep it going.
Junebug
ps. to Ian.. bug me about this next week and I'll post the best methods I know about and am using. Jb."
I would be curious to hear your methods, and test them against the ones I used. My goal with this little experiment is to find the best and most versatile way to sharpen, so I look forward to hearing about your methods.
-Ian A.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ianders1 on 2001-10-09 21:53 ]</font>
I think you missed the point of what I was doing. In response:
On 2001-10-09 14:24, Junebug wrote:
"Yipes...
Ian... just looked at your site with sharpening tests and results.
You appear to be comparing apples and oranges."
If you look at the results, you'll see a huge difference among the results.
"Sharpening rule of thumb is to sharpen an image only after it is resampled to final size."
I am aware of this rule, but I did not want to do any resampling - this modifies the image. And as far as sharpening at the final resolution (e.g. 300 or 360dpi) PhotoShop only sees pixels, not dpi, so whether it be 1600 or 300dpi, it's still the same number of pixels.
Also, not everyone prints out their scans, and these techniques apply to any method of delivery whether it be offset, inkjet, web, etc. I was simply searching for the best method. It's up to you, the user to determine how much to sharpen, based on your output.
"In the Nik Sharpener panel it appears you have tried inkjet auto scan and offset auto scan on a 72 ppi image. No wonder it fell apart. The internet autoscan actually looks pretty good. You have to realize that that internet image is going to be softened again when it is compressed."
If you had read my note, you'd see that I was trying for the best image possible, and that's why I used the Internet Autoscan. I went back and changed it to Inkjet, which achieved even more dire results. As for the 72 dpi issue, that's what nik Sharpener Pro automatically sets itself too. If you look at the screencap now, you'll see it says "Warning! Extremely High DPI" since it's the 1600dpi I've been working with.
"In the methods you favor, you are actually applying your own logic to the shapening settings... and yipes again... some of your settings are contrary to common sharpening practice."
If you're referring to my logic when applying the radius settings, I never claimed it to be scientific, but over the years,I've worked with various experts who've told me that for most scans under 300 dpi you should use around 0.8 - 1.2, and 1600dpi and beyond, 1.6-3.0 work best. You'll see these facts corroborated on almost any forum or expert's site. As for the "Hard Light Method" I've always found that a Radius of 10.0 is too large, even though it's commonly held to be the one and only setting. Check some other sources on this method, and most of them say you shouldn't exceed a radius of 5
"In conclusion.. Your quest for the best way to sharpen images is a worthy one.. but your test is flawed."
Why is my test flawed? I was trying to test for the best method to sharpen a file in PhotoShop, period. I applied logic to the quality of the results. The best methods allowed the most control over the appearance of the final image, and did not produce any obvious artifacts. Both Ultra-Sharpen and the Schewe technique are also non-destructive, in case your output needs change.
"I'm working on a photo exhibition this week and scanning and printing my head off. I can't jump in and add to this discussion as I would like to, but let's keep it going.
Junebug
ps. to Ian.. bug me about this next week and I'll post the best methods I know about and am using. Jb."
I would be curious to hear your methods, and test them against the ones I used. My goal with this little experiment is to find the best and most versatile way to sharpen, so I look forward to hearing about your methods.
-Ian A.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ianders1 on 2001-10-09 21:53 ]</font>
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest