Digital BW, The Print

I'm going to venture a guess that Bruce might say with today's sensors try sharpening both ways and use the one you like. 
Steve Lacko

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:21 AM, <paulkohl@...> wrote:

> It has been a long time since I have visited or posted to this group. I hope I am not beating a dead horse with this post. Background info: I am using an Epson 7880, Cone K7 Special Edition Inks, printing on Canson Rag Photographic paper.
> I have been using Nik Silver Express Pro for a while and have recently added the sharpening tools to my workflow.
> My question: do you use the Raw Presharpening tool as well as the output sharpening? I remember Bruce Fraser saying that sharpening should always be done in two steps. Thanks for any advice.
> Paul
> 
>

On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:21 AM, paulkohl@... wrote:

> My question: do you use the Raw Presharpening tool as well as the output sharpening? I remember Bruce Fraser saying that sharpening should always be done in two steps. Thanks for any advice.
> 
The sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom is based on Bruce's work (Adobe hired Bruce and Jeff Schewe to consult). The basis is that when you capture an image, the process blurs the image slightly so capture sharpening works to overcome the effects. Then, when you print out an image, the printing process once again blurs the image so output sharpening (also in Lightroom from the same consult) works to overcome the effects. In between the two sharpenings, you have creative sharpening where you can apply it to make areas of your image sharper.

If you don't use Lightroom and don't want to roll your own methods, you can also get sharpening through Nik Sharpener Pro or PixelGenius' PhotoKit Sharpener (Bruce was part of the group till his death and Jeff and others are carrying on).

Jim

> My question: do you use the Raw Presharpening tool as well as the
> output sharpening? I remember Bruce Fraser saying that sharpening
> should always be done in two steps.

The process I picked up from a variety of sources is to use *three* steps:

1) "RAW Presharpening" in conjunction with conversion from RAW format. This may do nothing more than attempt to counteract the anti-alias filter in the camera. Some RAW converters, such as Iridient Developer and DxO Optics Pro ("DxO Lens Softness"), have particularly good sharpening routines for this purpose. The developer of Iridient Developer apparently takes the position that this step should be carried out in the RAW development process itself, since noise control and sharpness necessarily play off against each other. Some people claim that many RAW developers include some degree of "pre sharpening" even when sharpening is supposedly turned off. 

2) "Creative sharpening" done in conjunction with adjusting colour, local contrast, balance, etc. This is highly dependent on intent and image content, and often involves the extensive use of masking or "brushes".

3) "Output sharpening" done for a specific output. Nik's output sharpening is very good at this, but I find it much more convenient to have this done "on the fly" when the file/image is actually being printed or otherwise output. Aperture and Lightroom have this capability, while Photoshop (at least through CS6) does not. 

Having become accustomed to this way of thinking, I find Nik's two stage approach a bit frustrating. Their presharpening and output sharpening as sufficiently good that I would like to see what they could do with the "creative" stage, too.   And because I usually prefer to do basic, overall sharpening at the RAW stage, I end up using their RAW Presharpener at the "creative" stage.

Myron

> My question: do you use the Raw Presharpening tool as well as the
> output sharpening? I remember Bruce Fraser saying that sharpening
> should always be done in two steps.

The process I picked up from a variety of sources is to use *three* steps:

1) "RAW Presharpening" in conjunction with conversion from RAW format. This may do nothing more than attempt to counteract the anti-alias filter in the camera. Some RAW converters, such as Iridient Developer and DxO Optics Pro ("DxO Lens Softness"), have particularly good sharpening routines for this purpose. The developer of Iridient Developer apparently takes the position that this step should be carried out in the RAW development process itself, since noise control and sharpness necessarily play off against each other. Some people claim that many RAW developers include some degree of "pre sharpening" even when sharpening is supposedly turned off. 

2) "Creative sharpening" done in conjunction with adjusting colour, local contrast, balance, etc. This is highly dependent on intent and image content, and often involves the extensive use of masking or "brushes".

3) "Output sharpening" done for a specific output. Nik's output sharpening is very good at this, but I find it much more convenient to have this done "on the fly" when the file/image is actually being printed or otherwise output. Aperture and Lightroom have this capability, while Photoshop (at least through CS6) does not. 

Having become accustomed to this way of thinking, I find Nik's two stage approach a bit frustrating. Their presharpening and output sharpening as sufficiently good that I would like to see what they could do with the "creative" stage, too.   And because I usually prefer to do basic, overall sharpening at the RAW stage, I end up using their RAW Presharpener at the "creative" stage.

Myron

> My question: do you use the Raw Presharpening tool as well as the
> output sharpening? I remember Bruce Fraser saying that sharpening
> should always be done in two steps.

The process I picked up from a variety of sources is to use *three* steps:

1) "RAW Presharpening" in conjunction with conversion from RAW format. This may do nothing more than attempt to counteract the anti-alias filter in the camera. Some RAW converters, such as Iridient Developer and DxO Optics Pro ("DxO Lens Softness"), have particularly good sharpening routines for this purpose. The developer of Iridient Developer apparently takes the position that this step should be carried out in the RAW development process itself, since noise control and sharpness necessarily play off against each other. Some people claim that many RAW developers include some degree of "pre sharpening" even when sharpening is supposedly turned off. 

2) "Creative sharpening" done in conjunction with adjusting colour, local contrast, balance, etc. This is highly dependent on intent and image content, and often involves the extensive use of masking or "brushes".

3) "Output sharpening" done for a specific output. Nik's output sharpening is very good at this, but I find it much more convenient to have this done "on the fly" when the file/image is actually being printed or otherwise output. Aperture and Lightroom have this capability, while Photoshop (at least through CS6) does not. 

Having become accustomed to this way of thinking, I find Nik's two stage approach a bit frustrating. Their presharpening and output sharpening as sufficiently good that I would like to see what they could do with the "creative" stage, too.   And because I usually prefer to do basic, overall sharpening at the RAW stage, I end up using their RAW Presharpener at the "creative" stage.

Myron

Fraser is still correct, pre sharpening in ACR uses a different algorithm than PS or Nik and is a "global" application of the sharpening to the image - Fraser suggests that all digital images  regardless of source will need at least a 50% "dose" in ACR as a first step -  better digital capture may alter this in the future - but for now this is still a good general starting point.  I use a 
very similar print set up - images printed with the K7 inks and the Cone Editions curves do benefit from careful sharpening- as part of the workflow
Berel Lutsky
Associate Professor of Art
UW Manitowoc
920-683-4735

Thanks to MyronG for his response to my question concerning Nik two stage sharpening. I wonder if anyone else that uses this road has noticed a change in the tonal quality of the image from before to after the final sharpening? I seem to be seeing a lessening of contrast towards a "smoother" tonal range. It is not unpleasant but I like a "punchier" print, so I am a bit surprised by this change that I am seeing.
Paul


Paul Kohl
Visiting Professor
Art, Design and Media
Nanyang Technological University
Singapore

CONFIDENTIALITY:This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete it,notify us and do not copy,use,or disclose its content.

Towards A Sustainable Earth:Print Only When Necessary.Thank you.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paul Roark <roark.paul@...> wrote:

>
> >...Fraser suggests that all digital images regardless of source will need
> at least a 50% "dose" in ACR as a first step - better digital capture may
> alter this in the future ...
> 
> I quickly learned with the Leica M9 to do NO sharpening in ACR.  If you
> have a sensor with no diffusion filter, beware of any global sharpening.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>Good point - an M9 may be in your present, for many of us it is still in the future - and per Fraser and Schewe in Real World Sharpening ACR is still a good place to start- and 50% is a good starting point- and I emphasize starting point - an adjustment can go either way from there (and should) While RWS might be a little dated at this point its still an excellent resource. The operative here was and still is, that the majority of digital images from most capture devices will need sharpening in their workflow, More to the point is that a fully realized BW print depends upon a well informed sharpening workflow - one size will not fit all, and one will need to learn to get beyond presets and "canned workflows" to do it correctly

This is exactly what I have been searching for. It is great! Thanks so much...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE_JeP06IG4
Paul


Paul Kohl
Visiting Professor
Art, Design and Media
Nanyang Technological University
Singapore

CONFIDENTIALITY:This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete it,notify us and do not copy,use,or disclose its content.

Towards A Sustainable Earth:Print Only When Necessary.Thank you.

> ... I wonder if anyone else that uses this road has noticed a change in the tonal quality of the image from before to after the final sharpening? I seem to be seeing a lessening of contrast towards a "smoother" tonal range. It is not unpleasant but I like a "punchier" print, so I am a bit surprised by this change that I am seeing.

I have not seen this.  I just played around with the Nik "Output Sharpener" and noticed (for the first time!!) that in addition to "Output Sharpening", the plugin also has a menu for "Creative Sharpening".  (This menu was collapsed, which may account for my failure to notice it.)  Is it possible that what you are seeing comes from one of the "creative" controls being set to a minus value?

It is not obvious how the output sharpening and creative sharpening interact with each other.    

Is there a way to disable the output sharpening while retaining the creative stage? I can certainly imagine using control points and "creative" effects to produce the basic image I want without having a *specific* output in mind.  It would be nice to be able to save all of this sharpening to a kind of master final version which would then be out-put sharpened according needs of the moment.

Yes. The default for output sharpening is 100% put it at zero%. Then use the creative sharpening to taste. Cool with control points

> > Is there a way to disable the output sharpening while retaining the
> > creative stage? 

> Yes. The default for output sharpening is 100%  put it at zero%.  Then use
> the creative sharpening to taste. Cool with control points

Excellent!!  Thank you, Bill (Storm).

My ignorance in this case is the direct result of owning and using so many different pieces of software that I often fail to thoroughly learn to use *anything* at a very deep level.   Back in 1983 I spent $300 on a wordprocessor (XyWrite), and used it exclusively for years. I used to fall asleep at night going through the (ample, printed) manual. I still know XyWrite's details between than any of the many other wordprocessors I have used since.

I had the same experience with WordPerfect and Quark Express!

Myron,

did you look at the video posted by Bill? It addresses exactly that 
issue. The idea is to use the same module for creative and for output 
sharpening. When you do the creative sharpening though, you simply put 
the "Output Sharpening Strength"-slider to zero. Thus you can work with 
the three sliders "Structure", "Local Contrast" and "Focus" and with 
control points in a creative way. Once done, exit Nik's software to save 
the generic document. In the next step and on a new layer you will then 
do the output sharpening according to your output device.

Also very interesting is the suggestion to put all Nik-sharpening-layers 
in luminosity rather than normal mode, thus avoiding the color shifts 
that sometimes come along with sharpening.

Louis

On 08/09/2013 18:45, MyronG wrote:
> It is not obvious how the output sharpening and creative sharpening 
> interact with each other. Is there a way to disable the output 
> sharpening while retaining the creative stage? I can certainly imagine 
> using control points and "creative" effects to produce the basic image 
> I want without having a *specific* output in mind. It would be nice to 
> be able to save all of this sharpening to a kind of master final 
> version which would then be out-put sharpened according needs of the 
> moment.

> did you look at the video posted by Bill? 
Yes, now I have. Excellent video.

I agree that blending sharpening layers via luminosity is a good/interesting idea.  It had never occurred to me.  ...but then I am frustratingly colour-challenged.

I think Nik would do well to rename  Output Sharpening, since it in fact is Creative & Output Sharpening.   Even that name change would have pushed me enough to figure out how to do creative sharpening alone.   AS IN:  "Bloody hell! How am I supposed to do this if I don't want to print *now*?  Sheeh!  [ stomp, stomp, stomp around the house, and take the dogs for a run or walk ]  Ah! Of course. How obvious!  [ that coming after about 4 miles ]  :-)