Sharpening before/after export to CS5

[mvsoske]

I've searched the archives but have not found an answer.  The issue is, when sending an image from LR to PS to do additional work with the intent of bringing it back into LR for final outputting, do I send the file with capture and creative sharpening or send it without, but apply the capture and creative sharpening in the now .tif or .psd file back in LR?  I am not talking about final output sharpening.  If I apply the sharpening to the file before I send it to PS, when it is back in LR, should I leave the sharpening off (again, not the final output sharpening)?

Mark

[Schewe]

You want to use the LR capture sharpening and noise reduction before going to Photoshop yes...whether or not you can do enough "creative" sharpening in LR depends on your needs. But you really should do the capture sharpening...the combination of demosiacing, sharpening and noise reduction in LR is very good and allows you to optimize the image detail. Opening an image with no LR sharpening and noise reduction and waiting till you save the tiff or psd back into LR will not be as good.

[Walter Schulz]

If I have an image with very high noise levels I prefer to use Noiseware Pro Photoshop plug-in. In such rare cases it works best for me to disable sharpening and noise reduction in LR.
I've seen real enhancements in LR's noise reduction and consequently I have to switch to external de-noising less in newer LR versions.

Time to re-evaluate my workflow, I suppose.

Ciao, Walter

[mvsoske]

Thanks Jeff!

[Rand47]

Let me add my thanks to Jeff!  This is something I have been wondering about.  My instinct tells me what Jeff has confirmed, but it is good to have it from "The Source."  LOL
Jeff, we should call you "Q." 

[Robert Katz]

In followup to Jeff's answer.  I do all my input  sharpening in LR. When I bring my image back to LR from PS all the sliders (that were previously adjusted) are now back to baseline. Am I safe to assume that the changes I have made in LR are now "baked in" to the TIFF file and unless the image needs it I should not redo input sharpening?
Thanks
Robert

[Schewe]

Am I safe to assume that the changes I have made in LR are now "baked in" to the TIFF file and unless the image needs it I should not redo input sharpening?

Yes...except for output sharpening which goes on top of everything...

And not for noting, I used to use and advocated 3rd party noise reduction...that was before the new noise reduction in LR 3/ACR 6.

[HaroldLudman]

I too have found LR4 noise reduction comparable in quality with Topaz denoise, and with Noise Ninja.

Harold L

[BartvanderWolf]

... I used to use and advocated 3rd party noise reduction...that was before the new noise reduction in LR 3/ACR 6.

Hi Jeff,

Which only suggests that the LR 3+ noise reduction has improved over previous versions, which I could agree with.
However, are you really suggesting ("that was before") that it's better than the dedicated (!, although less convenient) noise reduction altenatives (offering much more control) that are available?

Cheers,
Bart

[Schewe]

However, are you really suggesting ("that was before") that it's better than the dedicated (!, although less convenient) noise reduction altenatives (offering much more control) that are available?

It's my experience using my cameras at the ISO's I shoot, I now get better results combining both capture sharpening and noise reduction at the same time in ACR or LR. That's my experience and it doesn't seem to make sense to NOT sharpen in in ACR/LR, process into Photoshop to run a 3rd party filter (even though is may have lot's of controls) and then go back at the image for sharpening in Photoshop. Nope, that's an old and not very efficient workflow for digital capture. Works fine for scans of grainy film but is not really optimal for raw processing...

[Bryan Conner]

It's my experience using my cameras at the ISO's I shoot, I now get better results combining both capture sharpening and noise reduction at the same time in ACR or LR. That's my experience and it doesn't seem to make sense to NOT sharpen in in ACR/LR, process into Photoshop to run a 3rd party filter (even though is may have lot's of controls) and then go back at the image for sharpening in Photoshop. Nope, that's an old and not very efficient workflow for digital capture. Works fine for scans of grainy film but is not really optimal for raw processing...

I agree completely with using the NR in ACR 6 instead of a third party NR filter.  I have both Noiseware Pro as well as Neat Image Pro and I have not been able to get BETTER results from either compared to what I get using the built in NR in ACR 6.  I can get very good results from both, but not better as far as I can see.  So, I go the easy, streamlined, workflow friendly way and use ACR 6. 

[Walter Schulz]

Well, it seems we have a disagreement.
A suggestion: Someone with a decent test target will produce some files with different ISO settings (RAW), upload them to dropbox/mediafire/etc., link them here and let the show begin.

Bart, will you participate?

Ciao, Walter