Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon D800E and Detail Sharpening ?  (Read 4469 times)
Phil Corley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« on: April 02, 2013, 04:16:02 PM »
ReplyReply

I have seen many thoughts on Capture Sharpening and the Nikon D800E; some say turn the Detail Amount to Zero for D800E files; others say adjust to taste; others say use the default values, but change Radius to 0.5.

Just wondered what people here do with their sharpening and the D800E (for those that use the D800E)?

Thanks

Phil
Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1219



« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2013, 06:08:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Right now I am using
Amount 75
Radius .5
Detail 35
Masking 30
Luminance 15

I'm probably going to end up dialing the capture sharpening back to 60 or 65, I'm still fiddling with it.

After opening in Photoshop and uprezzing with Photozoom to output size at 360 dpi I do another round of sharpening with Smart Sharpen at 125 to 150%, radius .5, then straight to print.  I may back off the Smart Sharpening a little more in the future, I'm still feeling my way. 

Sharpening the  D800E files is quite different than sharpening crop sensor files shot with poorer glass I am finding.  On the one hand you dont need to sharpen as much in the first place.  On the other hand, you can crank the sharpening up a lot higher without inducing artifacting if you want to.
Logged

luxborealis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1221



WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2013, 06:42:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Suggested by Bernard Languillier in the article "The D800 is Here to Stay!" (April 2012 - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d800_here_to_stay.shtml)
Quote
Following generic advice from Jeff, I ended up liking the following settings best.

strength 60, radius 0.7, detail 40, mask 10, luminosity noise reduction 10.


I've used these settings with great success, increasing the radius with lower frequency subjects.

Bernard - do you still find these settings a helpful starting point?
Logged

Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature
- visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!
Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822



WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2013, 07:54:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I have been using the same sharpening as I use for my Canons (5D III and 1Ds III) which is amount=50, radius=0.8, detail=70 and masking=30. I could go slightly higher in some cases. for f/16 or higher I turn radius up to 1.0 or 1.1 and detail to 100. On the Phase One IQ160 I use the same sharpening also, but in some cases I can also here add more sharpening, but hardly ever do it since I would not see it in the end result.
Logged

Phil Corley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2013, 12:51:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmm, this is not the expected findings   Grin

I find that I am best applying no sharpening in LR, but I will apply creative and output sharpening in Photoshop using Photokit Sharpener.

I really did expect people to be saying very low or no LR sharpening given the "lack" of AA filter in the D880E - just trying to work out if I am doing it wrong Huh

Phil
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8028


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2013, 01:51:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Our mileage my vary.

Capture sharpening in LR is based on Photokit Sharpener, but the Adobe engineers added some features, like limiting haloes and deconvolution. Output sharpening is also based on Photokit Sharpener but limited to to inkjet, does not handle contone.

Best regards
Erik

Hmm, this is not the expected findings   Grin

I find that I am best applying no sharpening in LR, but I will apply creative and output sharpening in Photoshop using Photokit Sharpener.

I really did expect people to be saying very low or no LR sharpening given the "lack" of AA filter in the D880E - just trying to work out if I am doing it wrong Huh

Phil
Logged

AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1219



« Reply #6 on: April 03, 2013, 01:54:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmm, this is not the expected findings   Grin

I find that I am best applying no sharpening in LR, but I will apply creative and output sharpening in Photoshop using Photokit Sharpener.

I really did expect people to be saying very low or no LR sharpening given the "lack" of AA filter in the D880E - just trying to work out if I am doing it wrong Huh

Phil

I will say that with my subject matter, capture and creative sharpening are merged into a single step, possible because of the ability to mask in the sharpening module.  Different subject matter might require a different workflow.
Logged

Phil Corley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 100


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2013, 01:57:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I should clarify that I am talking about landscape images, so often being high frequency images.

Also, I am just referring to Capture sharpening; I realize that output specific sharpening will always be required.

Phil
Logged
JRSmit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 416


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2013, 11:21:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Use a d800e and do apply capture sharpeingin in LR. De amount is about 50-60, radius about 0.7, details at default 25, lumin noise red about 5-10, masking sometimes , fi with headshots.
On my d700 the numbers are higher.
Logged

Fine art photography: janrsmit.com
Fine Art Printing Specialist: www.fineartprintingspecialist.nl


Jan R. Smit
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8028


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2013, 12:44:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I am not shooting Nikon, but a recipe I came up with is:

Amount: 45%
Radius: 0.7 (use larger radius when stopped down, I use 1.3 for f/16 for instance)
Detail: 100% that kicks in deconvolution instead of unsharp mask according Eric Chan (lead developer at Adobe)
I use some masking and some noise supression.

Something I tried lately was to use unsharp mask as a second step in sharpening. Try to capture sharpen optimally but try an extra step of sharpening with radius=3 and amount=25%, see if you like the effect.

The figures I mention work for me, and may be a bit excessive on D800E at optimum aperture.

You could also try: Radius=1, Amount=100, Detail=0 that gives excessive sharpening but strong halo reduction.

Best regards
Erik


I should clarify that I am talking about landscape images, so often being high frequency images.

Also, I am just referring to Capture sharpening; I realize that output specific sharpening will always be required.

Phil
Logged

Mike Guilbault
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 841



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 06, 2013, 08:17:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't sharpening image dependent?  I didn't think any one set of settings could be used universally. I sharpen each image individually so the amount can vary from, usually, 20 or 25 up to maybe 80 for the amount.  The others don't seem to vary as much, but again I don't use a pre-determined amount.
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3909


« Reply #11 on: April 06, 2013, 08:34:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't sharpening image dependent?  I didn't think any one set of settings could be used universally. I sharpen each image individually so the amount can vary from, usually, 20 or 25 up to maybe 80 for the amount.  The others don't seem to vary as much, but again I don't use a pre-determined amount.

Hi Mike,

Actually, when we assume a correct technique was used, Capture sharpening is not image content depended, but totally hardware dependent. The lens (with residual aberrations and diffraction), the AA-filter, the sensel apertures, the demosaicing of the Bayer CFA, they all add to an overall blur.

That blur can be characterized, and most of it can be removed with deconvolution sharpening. The problem comes when people think they can address all sharpening matters (Capture, Creative, and Output) with a single control ...

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2956



WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2013, 09:15:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Mike,

Actually, when we assume a correct technique was used, Capture sharpening is not image content depended, but totally hardware dependent. The lens (with residual aberrations and diffraction), the AA-filter, the sensel apertures, the demosaicing of the Bayer CFA, they all add to an overall blur.


That seems to imply it is somewhat image independent, but not based on the content of the image but rather the camera/lens/f-stop combination?  For example if you are using a pretty small aperture, knowing you will get some diffraction, wouldn't you modify the capture sharpening somewhat?  I assume this is the best place in the work flow to try and correct diffraction.
Logged

ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8028


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2013, 01:52:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes,

I agree, and so does Bart.

I found that I use a small radius for sharp images at optimum apertures and increase radius to perhaps 1.3 for images shot at f/16.

I know Bart has developed some math to measure/calculate optimal radius, but what I do is to crank up amount and increase radius until I see halos and decrease radius a bit. After that I reduce amount. 

Best regards
Erik



That seems to imply it is somewhat image independent, but not based on the content of the image but rather the camera/lens/f-stop combination?  For example if you are using a pretty small aperture, knowing you will get some diffraction, wouldn't you modify the capture sharpening somewhat?  I assume this is the best place in the work flow to try and correct diffraction.
Logged

BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3909


« Reply #14 on: April 07, 2013, 06:23:43 AM »
ReplyReply

That seems to imply it is somewhat image independent, but not based on the content of the image but rather the camera/lens/f-stop combination?

Hi Wayne,

That's correct. Not the image content/subject matter dictates Capture sharpening, but the capture process does.

Quote
For example if you are using a pretty small aperture, knowing you will get some diffraction, wouldn't you modify the capture sharpening somewhat?  I assume this is the best place in the work flow to try and correct diffraction.

Absolutely. Here is the result of an analysis I made for a specific Camera/Lens combination, and it shows how the required Capture sharpening radius varies over the range of apertures that that combination offers:


The exact blur radius varies per Camera/Lens combination, and can be determined with a tool I've made available, as discussed here.

The difficulty is that many people also want to control creative sharpening (accentuating or reducing surface structure) with the same sharpening tool, in the same sharpening dialog/session. That's not the optimal route to take. One should preferably use adjustment brushes/layers for additional sharpening/blurring requirements, and controls like Clarity, instead of the Capture sharpening dialog.

The Capture sharpening dialog is for the compensation of Capture process induced blur (=hardware and demosaicing), and the optimal sharpening radius should vary with the aperture that was used. One would expect that the EXIF provides useful info for the Raw converter to present us with better sharpening defaults, but alas ...

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Mike Guilbault
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 841



WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 07, 2013, 07:08:59 AM »
ReplyReply

It appears that I've been unknowingly doing it correctly then - just didn't take the time to understand why or notice that the aperture was the difference.  I'll make a conscious effort to notice this now.  Thanks for the clarification.
Logged

jrsforums
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2013, 10:29:21 AM »
ReplyReply

That's not the optimal route to take. One should preferably use adjustment brushes/layers for additional sharpening/


Unfortunately, if one wishes to stay in Lightroom, adjustment brush sharpening is linked to 'Detail' sharpening.  This, kind of, forces a round trip to PS.

John
Logged

John
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3909


« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2013, 11:39:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Unfortunately, if one wishes to stay in Lightroom, adjustment brush sharpening is linked to 'Detail' sharpening.  This, kind of, forces a round trip to PS.

Hi John,

That's correct, and a significant drawback of how sharpening with the adjustment brush is implemented in LR. It may be a left over from old dogmas that suggested that sharpening is linked to image detail size. Well, Capture sharpening isn't, it is instead highly correlated with the hardware used for capturing.

Creative sharpening is something else, and should be allowed to have its own sharpening parameters.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad