Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Aptus 75 sharpening  (Read 2856 times)
KristerH
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« on: September 01, 2006, 08:08:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi all.

Its nice to see so many posts suddenly in this forum. I realy missed James R from RG forum so its extra nice to see him here again.
( I loved this James. http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/lg2/. Is it lens or photoshop)

I have been revieing DB no for 5 month and are finaly recieving my very own Leaf Aptus 75 the week to come.
After testing it for a day at my dealer I have been playing with the files back an fourth and cant find a perfect way for initaial sharpening. So now the question from a former Canon guy is. Do you apply any initial sharpening at all before delivering your files?

As I recall the initial sharp was to remove the effect from the filter on the canon but maybe there is no filter on the sensor of the Leaf.

What do you have to say about this.
Logged
ericstaud
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 384


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2006, 12:00:57 PM »
ReplyReply

A few photogs I know let the images go out with the default sharpening in LC10.  Right now I prefer the Pixel Genius Photokit sharpener (PK sharpener)  with my Aptus 75.  I use the Scan Back Capture setting with the sharpen layer group at 100%.  I consider the images I deliver "capture sharpened".  I cannot output sharpen for my clients because I never know what output is being used.  I saw the same image of mine printed 30"x40" lightjet, 2"x2" in a magazine, and 300x300 pixels on a web site.  Each of those resized files must be output sharpened to different ammounts.

When I finish my edits and have processed all the Raw files I need, I then run a batch on all the tiffs to capture sharpen them at the same setting, and then to flatten them.

This is a batch I run while doing other things in the office.  it is fairly processor intensive if you are working with 200mb files (16 bit).  Of course, mastering Leafs built in sharpening would be much more time efficient in the end.  I have, over time, tried sharpening about 10 images in both the Leaf software and in PK sharpener and have each time been more comfortable with the PK results.

I have just bought "Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop CS2".... 288 pages by Bruce Fraser.  Most of my friends look at me like I am crazy... at least until they see the inkjet prints that result from proper sharpening.

-Eric
Logged
KristerH
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2006, 12:59:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Eric. Thanks for input. I am working with photokit sharpener as well but the initial results with scanningback sharpen are a little bit to "digital" to me. A least on the screen.I would love to keep this wonderful analog look of the aptusfile. The results ,except for sharpening so far, are very promising. Straight out of camera with just a small contrast curve. Lovley. They look much more mature than the canon ever did.
I have been reading info about post processing from the the people who have been using aptus and
think that this will be the primary task for the weeks to come. Finding a fast and rock solid workflow that will stand up against stress. What app are you using for the first step of picking the keepers. This is vital as I see it now. To minimize the rawconverting to the files that are realy useful to the client. I have tried ivew and it looks like a solid software. My clients hates technical hick ups so before the post goes with flow I will keep the Aptus out of reach for them.
Logged
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2006, 03:17:11 PM »
ReplyReply

i have owned both leaf and phase backs and my experience is that unlike canon files, there is mostly no need for sharpening...applying a curve (or inreasing contrast) usually does the job...especially if you don't know how and where the image will end up...size and medium make a huge difference and need completely different sharpening approaches...
i also find that a lot depends on the lenses..i know my lenses and know which ones need a little more or nothing at all...same for f-stops...and then there is image content...i gave up on a set sharpening point...i do have a setting stored in C1 but it is the least amount of sharpening possible and i simply turn it on or off....
about learning the workflow: you mentioned iview...they just got bought by microsoft and the future of mac releases is uncertain (i believe they want to use the technology within their system, like iphoto)...as much as i like iview and as much as it is in most people's workflow, i would think about including it in my workflow if i was starting right now......both apple and adobe have noticed the interest in iview and have come out with their own solutions, both are not quite there yet, but they will be soon and they will make sure that you don't have to change and re-learn next year....
Logged

free1000
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2006, 03:20:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I use minimal or no sharpening with the Aptus 75, especially when using a digital lens. I use a bit with film lenses, but it depends on the usage. For providing files to clients I use none or very little.

One of the main advantages of something like the Aptus 75 is that you dont really have to sharpen, or correct distortion in the images, which is necessary with the shots I used to get from the Canon. This helps reduce the longer workflow time of processing the bigger files.

I think that the apparent sharpness of files is something that is part of the creative control with digital, a softer look might be just a different aesthetic. Once you have the detail of 33+ megapixels there is plenty of detail, perhaps sharpening just makes it look different.

Looking at older classic photos, they were mostly far softer than would be acceptable today, but they have their own charm. Perhaps once our cameras are as good as we need, we can start to use sharpness as one more variable in creating an image. I'm wondering if we arent going to get to the point (if we arent there already) where are printers are what are letting us down.  Lightjets print at under 300dpi, but an 8x10 from an A75 contains more data than that. Similarly inkjets provide a detailed print at 180-240dpi and dont seem to benefit from more data.
Logged

@foliobook
Foliobook professional photography folio for iPad
www.foliobook.mobi
nicolaasdb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2006, 05:05:49 PM »
ReplyReply

why did you go for a 75 instead of a 65?? I am thinking of buying a leaf...after testing both leaf and phase..the leaf rep told me there isn't any image quality difference just a smaller sensor in the 65.

I didn't test the 65 only the 75..so I can't compare files..like I did with the phase p45 and p30 where I prefered the p45...slightly better color.

anything I should know?? thanks in advance
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2006, 05:17:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a leaf 65 but would have preferred a 75.  The reason is that you have more movement capabilities on a 6x9 format  with the larger sensor.  

Quote
why did you go for a 75 instead of a 65?? I am thinking of buying a leaf...after testing both leaf and phase..the leaf rep told me there isn't any image quality difference just a smaller sensor in the 65.

I didn't test the 65 only the 75..so I can't compare files..like I did with the phase p45 and p30 where I prefered the p45...slightly better color.

anything I should know?? thanks in advance
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75943\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad