Digital BW, The Print

Gary there are better sharpening tools than the USM in photoshop, you
should know about. 

There's Johnny Deadman's sharpen filter, which contains the "bruce
fraser" sharpening filter in its folder. Both are excellent. The best
I've yet found is the "Boundary" Sharpen in KPT's Power Tools version 
6.0. Also, there's the high pass/soft light method you can use after any
of the others that sharpens just a little more. None of these filters
have the artifacts you can get with the Photoshop Unsharp Mask tool if
you use too much of it. (Well they COULD have if you use them at too
high of a setting).  There's also the Katrin Eisemann Filter Factory
sharpen tool that she explains in her book on photoshop retouching. To
use this one, you just type some numbers she gives you in photoshop's
filter factory window.  Be sure and try all of these before deciding on
the Photoshop USM.

Jerry




Gary Benson wrote:

> 
> Daren M. wrote:
> > Second, open USM and enter these amounts as a STARTING point -
> > Amount 125%, Radius 0.5, Threshold 0.  I usually leave the
> > radius very low (.03 - 1.0), Amount high (200 - 300%) and Threshold
> > low as well (0 - 4).  I begin working with the Amount setting and
> > raise it until the image looks SHARP (not
> > overly sharp, though)! <snip>
> 
> This is terrific!  I can't wait to try this procedure on my own
> images.  I too had noticed what appeared to be excessive "grain" on
> my 35mm scans (Canoscan 2710), even on the Ilford Pan F I shoot most
> often, though the actual print (usually 8x10) looked better than the
> image on the monitor.  I'm headed into the digital darkroom now to
> try this out.  Thanks Daren!
> 
> Gary Benson
> Eagle River, Alaska
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Jerry Olson wrote:

> Gary there are better sharpening tools than the USM in photoshop, you
> should know about.
>
> There's Johnny Deadman's sharpen filter, which contains the "bruce
> fraser" sharpening filter in its folder. Both are excellent. The best
> I've yet found is the "Boundary" Sharpen in KPT's Power Tools version
> 6.0. Also, there's the high pass/soft light method you can use after
> any
> of the others that sharpens just a little more. None of these filters
> have the artifacts you can get with the Photoshop Unsharp Mask tool if
>
> you use too much of it. (Well they COULD have if you use them at too
> high of a setting).  <SNIP>
>

So, they're just like USM?  They all have artifacts if used
improperly?     ;)

Daren


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If you check the lists archives you will find disussions on the various
techniques. The best place to get started may be
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/high-pass-sharpening.htm

Give it a try, you'll discover for yourself what the differences can be. Try
using different blending modes, not just hard light. I personally prefer the
soft light mode as I have previously discussed.

From there download John Deadman's techniques... he has another technique on
Micheal's site as well... all very interesting.

Carolyn

> Jerry Olson wrote:
> 
>> Gary there are better sharpening tools than the USM in photoshop, you
>> should know about.
>> 
>> There's Johnny Deadman's sharpen filter, which contains the "bruce
>> fraser" sharpening filter in its folder. Both are excellent. The best
>> I've yet found is the "Boundary" Sharpen in KPT's Power Tools version
>> 6.0. Also, there's the high pass/soft light method you can use after
>> any
>> of the others that sharpens just a little more. None of these filters
>> have the artifacts you can get with the Photoshop Unsharp Mask tool if
>> 
>> you use too much of it. (Well they COULD have if you use them at too
>> high of a setting).  <SNIP>
>> 
> 
> So, they're just like USM?  They all have artifacts if used
> improperly?     ;)
> 
> Daren

Ah yes , I've picked up other useful stuff from there - I'll check it out . Thanks .
Steve

  If you check the lists archives you will find disussions on the various
  techniques. The best place to get started may be
  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/high-pass-sharpening.htm

  Give it a try, you'll discover for yourself what the differences can be. Try
  using different blending modes, not just hard light. I personally prefer the
  soft light mode as I have previously discussed.

  From there download John Deadman's techniques... he has another technique on
  Micheal's site as well... all very interesting.

  Carolyn


  > Jerry Olson wrote:
  > 
  >> Gary there are better sharpening tools than the USM in photoshop, you
  >> should know about.
  >> 
  >> There's Johnny Deadman's sharpen filter, which contains the "bruce
  >> fraser" sharpening filter in its folder. Both are excellent. The best
  >> I've yet found is the "Boundary" Sharpen in KPT's Power Tools version
  >> 6.0. Also, there's the high pass/soft light method you can use after
  >> any
  >> of the others that sharpens just a little more. None of these filters
  >> have the artifacts you can get with the Photoshop Unsharp Mask tool if
  >> 
  >> you use too much of it. (Well they COULD have if you use them at too
  >> high of a setting).  <SNIP>
  >> 
  > 
  > So, they're just like USM?  They all have artifacts if used
  > improperly?     ;)
  > 
  > Daren


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

No, they give much better results than USM.

Jerry




"Daren M." wrote:

> 
> Jerry Olson wrote:
> 
> > Gary there are better sharpening tools than the USM in photoshop, you
> > should know about.
> >
> > There's Johnny Deadman's sharpen filter, which contains the "bruce
> > fraser" sharpening filter in its folder. Both are excellent. The best
> > I've yet found is the "Boundary" Sharpen in KPT's Power Tools version
> > 6.0. Also, there's the high pass/soft light method you can use after
> > any
> > of the others that sharpens just a little more. None of these filters
> > have the artifacts you can get with the Photoshop Unsharp Mask tool if
> >
> > you use too much of it. (Well they COULD have if you use them at too
> > high of a setting).  <SNIP>
> >
> 
> So, they're just like USM?  They all have artifacts if used
> improperly?     ;)
> 
> Daren
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Jerry Olson wrote:

> No, they give much better results than USM.
>
> Jerry

It was a joke, I guess you didn't see the wink   -   ;)

I just thought it was a little funny that you said that the filters
didn't have any of the artifacting that USM, but really they could if
used wrong....

Daren


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jerry,

"The oft-maligned Unsharp Mask filter is capable of producing excellent
results, but to get them, you need to
 understand how it works, and a great many people don't."  - Bruse
Fraser

For the rest of you, this is a great article on Sharpening, the USM way.

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html

Daren


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The reason many of us use different approaches to sharpening is because many
images do not do well with USM, even though we are fully aware of how to use
it.  My own personal opinion is that your threshold settings are too high...
but again, that's my opinion. With threshold settings higher than your
radius settings you are conteracting the radius thus making the image soft
again.

I've personally never maligned USM, it has many great uses. But to use it
with other techniques makes it all the better at times.

I've used all of Bruce's techniques with great success over the years, and a
few of my own. But find that many of the newer techniques I've run across to
be just as successful... and lead to development of more of my own
techniques.  It's all good.

Carolyn


> Jerry,
> 
> "The oft-maligned Unsharp Mask filter is capable of producing excellent
> results, but to get them, you need to
> understand how it works, and a great many people don't."  - Bruse
> Fraser
> 
> For the rest of you, this is a great article on Sharpening, the USM way.
> 
> http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html
> 
> Daren

From an earlier post:

> enter these amounts as a STARTING point - Amount 125%, Radius 0.5,
> Threshold 0.  I usually leave the radius very low (.03 - 1.0), Amount
> high (200 - 300%) and Threshold low as well (0 - 4).  I begin working
> with the Amount setting and raise it until the image looks SHARP (not
> overly sharp, though)!  It will probably be quite grainy, but we'll fix
> that with Threshold, just get the fine details that should be sharp
> sharp.  If you're having problems using only the Amount try bumping your
> radius up a little (only 0.1 - 0.3), you should be getting decent

I Should have said you can sharpen more with them than unsharp mask
without artifacts appearing.

Jerry






"Daren M." wrote:

> 
> Jerry Olson wrote:
> 
> > No, they give much better results than USM.
> >
> > Jerry
> 
> It was a joke, I guess you didn't see the wink   -   ;)
> 
> I just thought it was a little funny that you said that the filters
> didn't have any of the artifacting that USM, but really they could if
> used wrong....
> 
> Daren
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/