Print Sharpening Settings

[Bob Rockefeller]

Reading Fraser/Schewe again in real World Print Sharpening, their work suggests something for output sharpening that we may be able to use in Aperture's print sharpening dialog.

They believe that 0.01" sharpening halos should be the largest used for "small" inkjet prints. At 360 pip (I print with Epson printers), that would suggest a radius setting of no more than 3.6 pixels.

Now the question is amount. I've been using the default 1.0 for glossy/luster inkjet papers and I think it looks fine.

Have others done more extensive testing on other paper stocks or at other print sizes?

Bob

[Bob Rockefeller]

Over 200 views and no tips from anyone!?

Bob

[Schewe]

Sorry, I don't use Aperture...

[KirbyKrieger]

Hi Bob -- you might try the Apple Aperture discussion group hosted by Apple -- it's a helpful and knowledgeable group (I post there regularly).

I always keep the Intensity setting of the Edge Sharpen Brick to less than 1.0, usually close to 0.75.  This is more personal choice than anything else (in my experience over-sharpening sets in quickly, and so I always under-sharpen).

I almost always print with Sharpening turned on and set to Amount = 0.29 and Radius = 0.29.

But note that I'm printing matte with an Epson 3880 on their Hot Press papers (I like the surface of the ink).

None of the above has been even casually tested.  I found settings that work and haven't experimented with making them better.

[Daniel Salazar]

hi Bob, I use Aperture since v. 1, I've. love-hate relation with it, I've though about changing to LR since years, however aft using it a few days, I go back. One of the issues make me think about switching is the printer subsystem. It's crap!!!, did I mention crap?
I would recommendo you, soft proofing and printing in Photoshop.
Cheers,
Daniel

[Bob Rockefeller]

I, too, have gone back and forth between Lightroom and Aperture several times, having started with Aperture version 1.0. And I always end up back with Aperture.

Lightroom's modules and collections are just too flawed for me to be comfortable with. Aperture, as a whole package, is just a better experience.

But I am hoping for printing improvements in Aperture's next version. Specifically better sharpening options (I don't guess Pixel Genius would license their print sharpening algorithms to both Adobe and Apple?) and more control of placing a watermark/logo in the print margin.

It looks as if I'll have to do more experimenting with various print sharpening amounts at various print sizes to develop my own print sharpening settings. I haven't been able to find much in the way of starting points online.

Bob

[Schewe]

I don't guess Pixel Genius would license their print sharpening algorithms to both Adobe and Apple?

We would have considered it (in fact we did) but Apple is kinda overhanded (read "draconian") and we declined to deal with them...

[Bob Rockefeller]

Thanks for some of the inside view, Jeff.

Maybe Apple has come up with their own "sauce" and we'll see it in the next version.

Bob

[StuartOnline]

Hi Bob,

I have gone back and forth between Aperture and Lightroom. Both have some good features. One feature I do like about Aperture is their backup "Vault". Makes it so easy for backing up. However with the new features in LR4 like soft proofing it makes printing so much easier. Also feel sharping features in LR is much better then in Aperture. Of course the real question is what new features will be in Aperture 4. However there is no real word if and when there will even be an Aperture 4. You would think Apple would make some sort of statement unless they plan to do away with iPhoto and replace it with Aperture 4 in the release of X Lion. It would be nice to know the future of Aperture.

Now with all of that said I am happy with LR4.

Stu