Quick n00b question...

0utpost31

Do you sharpen your RAW files then convert to jpeg, or convert to jpeg then sharpen?....:o

stcstc

sharpening is the very last thing you should do


although what are you making the JPGs for?

0utpost31

Convert to jpeg for flickr.... am I doing something wrong?

City-Exile

I only sharpen sports pics & they're all shot in jpeg.
The Canon DPP is good for sharpening.

stcstc

no your not doing anything wrong

just the way the post read, was as if you convert everything to JPG etc

its important to do all the scaling etc before you do the sharpening. so make all you adjustments first then sharpen

0utpost31

Ok, but do I sharpen the jpegs or sharpen the raw before converting....

stcstc

if your not doing anything else then you can sharpen the raw

but if your doing any processing in photoshop then sharpen after that.

I would suggest that some of the better sharpening techniques are only available in photoshop too, not in your raw processor

Shiny

Yep I would agree with sharpen then convert.

In fact I wouldn't do anything with a jpg bar uploading it
to the net.
Any adjustments I do are to Tiff's or Raw files only. :cool:

nilhg

0utpost31 wrote: »

Do you sharpen your RAW files then convert to jpeg, or convert to jpeg then sharpen?....:o

What software are you using to convert the RAWS, its hard to answer properly without knowing.

City-Exile wrote: »

I only sharpen sports pics & they're all shot in jpeg.
The Canon DPP is good for sharpening.

Your jpegs will have had some sharpening during the in camera conversion from RAW to jpeg, unless you have the sharpening turned off on your camera, and even then I believe that some makes still apply some.

0utpost31 wrote: »

Ok, but do I sharpen the jpegs or sharpen the raw before converting....

I can only really speak from experience of a workflow using Lightroom, and in there the reccomendation is to use both, in fact the default camera profile applies some on import and there are various extra profiles for different types of images. This is known as capture sharpening.

Lightroom 2 now also allows you to sharpen the images on export, this is done automatically but the settings are calculated by the program depending on your target usage and output size.

So the short answer is both

0utpost31

I use canon DPP to tweak photos and sharpen then convert to jpeg. Then I upload to flickr. That's my measly workflow.

YogiBear

The clarity option when processing raw images in photoshop, you can't do that after so it's ok to use that & use unsharp mask at end of total processing right?

stcstc

i tend to not do any sharpening at the raw conversion

as if you do, then sharpen using unsharp mask later, you are shapening and image that has already been sharpened.

nilhg

YogiBear wrote: »

The clarity option when processing raw images in photoshop, you can't do that after so it's ok to use that & use unsharp mask at end of total processing right?

Its OK to do whatever looks good to you.......

IIRC clarity is a form of localised contrast enhancement, acheived using a form of USM. More here

0utpost31

stcstc wrote: »

i tend to not do any sharpening at the raw conversion

as if you do, then sharpen using unsharp mask later, you are shapening and image that has already been sharpened.

I don't have photoshop I don't have a clue what an unsharp mask is. Must downl.... buy it soon.

AnCatDubh

I use Silkypix for raw work and it by default applies a little unsharp on save - I don't really know the logic of this default. Perhaps they assume that RAW->JPG from Silkypix is the last stage of the operation before flickr.

I've never been tempted to not do the unsharp thing. Nice little explaination of unsharp on wikipedia which is actually a sharpening technique (don't let the name confuse you).

But normally i wouldn't do a large amount of post processing thereafter so i wouldn't be sharpening again hence maybe i'm not noticing any ill effect of (un)sharpening from RAW->JPG.

City-Exile

I agree with what has been said above about sharpening being the last processing. It gives you better control over the final image.
Go easy on the sharpening though.
It can make your images look harsh on screen.

With regard to clarity, that's a contrast type adjustment.

stcstc

actually

I use guy gowns method of sharpening, and every image i print is sharpened at 500%

but thats for printing only

and what you see on the screen really isnt the most accurate when jusdging sharpness

Paulw

Shapening on screen can be very very different to sharpening for print. I've done some images that look way too harsh on screen, but when printed look brilliant and spot on.

The Guy Gowan approach may seem weird, but works for print. That's what his technique is for - for print.

Sharpening is always the last thing I do in any processing though.

Freddie59

I find there's no comparison between the original RAW file and the Jpeg image. The sheer clarity, etc of the RAW file is lost in the conversion, either using the supplied Canon Software, or through Image Converter Plus, or Picasa. Am I doing something wrong here?

0utpost31

What is the guy gowan method?

stcstc

they way he does it is using a chanel mask to do the sharpening

Paulw

Freddie59 wrote: »

I find there's no comparison between the original RAW file and the Jpeg image. The sheer clarity, etc of the RAW file is lost in the conversion, either using the supplied Canon Software, or through Image Converter Plus, or Picasa. Am I doing something wrong here?

In short, probably yes.

But, it really depends on what you want, and what you like. If you're happy with the jpg quality, then stick with that.

Processing raw images takes a little time and it's always a learning experience. You need to work out a process/procedure to get the file images to the way that YOU want.

Personally, I find Adobe Lightroom just brilliant, especially for processing raw images. You can download a 30 day free trial version from the Adobe site. No harm trying it.

CabanSail

If I am ONLY going to edit in Lightroom, & then export as a jpg, I will do some Sharpening at that stage. This would be for Screen Display.

If I am going to Print an image I will do a simple exposure adjustment in LR & then send the image to Photoshop as a TIFF or PSD file. I then use the Guy Gowan techniques to adjust the image before printing.

If you are not familar with the way Guy Gowan uses to process images then it's probably best to have a look at the DVD's he has produced. PM me if you want to know where to get them at a good price.

Freddie59

Paulw wrote: »

In short, probably yes.

But, it really depends on what you want, and what you like. If you're happy with the jpg quality, then stick with that.

Processing raw images takes a little time and it's always a learning experience. You need to work out a process/procedure to get the file images to the way that YOU want.

Personally, I find Adobe Lightroom just brilliant, especially for processing raw images. You can download a 30 day free trial version from the Adobe site. No harm trying it.

Thanks for that Paul.

The initial RAW files are pin-sharp, but the converted Jpeg files appear very soft. If I try to sharpen them in PS7 they merely degrade more.

Should I sharpen the RAW files more before conversion?

Paulw

Freddie59 wrote: »

The initial RAW files are pin-sharp, but the converted Jpeg files appear very soft. If I try to sharpen them in PS7 they merely degrade more.

Should I sharpen the RAW files more before conversion?

Actually, your first statement is slightly incorrect.

Within the raw file there is an embedded jpg preview file, which your camera needs to display the image. It is this jpg that you believe is pin-sharp.

I guess what you want is to make your raw files as sharp as the preview jpg.

For proper viewing, you need to view your images at 100% magnification. Also, your actual sharpening will depend on the end product - web/screen or print.

Each medium takes sharpening a different way, and even each type of print medium can be different. I'm no expert on this at all. stcstc knows more about the print end of it.

Screen sharpening makes the images quite soft for print. Print sharpening can look very harsh on screen.

You really need to process your files (contrast, brightness, white balance, saturation, etc) and when ready, then look towards sharpening the files.

Freddie59

Thanks again Paul.

I'm using the supplied Canon software (Zoom Browser Ex) to view the file (on the PC monitor) - so is this the actual RAW image that I'm looking at there? If I prit out from here the picture quality is superb, and the printout from the converted Jpeg is definitely worse, with fine details disimproved. Does that help in any way?

Paulw

Freddie59 wrote: »

I'm using the supplied Canon software (Zoom Browser Ex) to view the file (on the PC monitor) - so is this the actual RAW image that I'm looking at there? If I prit out from here the picture quality is superb, and the printout from the converted Jpeg is definitely worse, with fine details disimproved. Does that help in any way?

Well, raw is raw - totally unprocessed, pure raw data. So again, the Canon software, and other software is showing a rendering of the image (usually the embedded jpg).

I guess if you print from there, then you are printing defaults. When you start to process the image, maybe you are doing something to alter the image, which doesn't help the photo.

Maybe someone else can shed some light?

My only other advice - try something like Adobe Lightroom, and see what you think.

stcstc

is it maybe that the software you are using is automatically doing sharpening, then when you output it the sharpening is not being applied?

Freddie59

stcstc wrote: »

is it maybe that the software you are using is automatically doing sharpening, then when you output it the sharpening is not being applied?

Will check. Thanks.:)