Digital sharpening and resolution, upload advice

[bugmadmark]

I'm hoping someone can offer me some basic advice on how i should go about improving images off my digital cameras. I have one camera (EOS400D) that shoots Raw/Jpegs so maximum flexibility but no idea as yet how to use raw. Then my sons camera does only Jpegs.

I can manage to crop and adjust brightness, contrast and colour by eye ok. But what im unclear of is sharpening techniques and when to apply . As an example I start with a jpeg file and in Photoshop CS crop it to an aesthetically pleasing look. Without saving it (as i know multiple saving of jpegs causes reduction in mage quality) i then tweak brightness/contrast and adjust colour by eye. (im not sure if there are histograms in Photoshop CS?). Next I apply sharpening. Ive tried the unmask sharpening tool and the edge sharpening. Never sure what to do for the best. The ones I uploaded in the September sightings images today had 70% sharpening and 1.5 pixels. No idea whats too much or not enough. I wasn't sure if this varies on how much you cropped in in first place. For example - if you really crop in thight first then sharpen is the effect different compared if you sharpen the entire image first and then crop. I keep hearing about digitial workflows and assume there is a correct order in which to do this editing?

Anyway, Finally i save it as a different file name. Now in order to get it onto this site i read that I should make it no more than 800pixels wide. In PS i did this by selecting image> Image size > AUto resolution (best) = 266pxl/inch (default seems to be 72dpi). In the same window I then changed the width to 750 pixels wide > ok. Having gotten the image to the right width, I found that the file size was too big to upload even though 800pxls wide. I then used the save as function again and Jpeg option gives a slider to reduce image size from large file (max 12) so i slid this until it fell below the 256k max upload. Now am i doing this all wrong as ive had no practical advice and self taught myself so far. I note that the images i put up on the Sept post today look (to me) ok 'ish but noteed i still needed slider bars to see the whole image (i chose 750 pixel wide rather than 800 because i figured less would ensure i get them on with no sliders?). Ive just realised Ive asked a million questions here and now unsure if anyone knows what it is im trying to ask (and ive not even begun to get my head round Canons Digital Professional RAW editor software). Any advice on post image capture processing (or whatever it is called), tops tips for butterflies etc would really be welcomed! Obviously i use PS CS. Anyone recommend any books for RAW editing advice?

BW
Mark

[eccles]

Your resizing technique is pretty much what I do. I find a quality setting of 8 is plenty good enough and ends up with a jpeg around 150k in size.
Get used to shooting and processing raw. The Canon's jpeg engine is pretty good, but raw is better. For sharpening, when processing raw files I tweak the levels, white balance etc. For web display I leave Photoshop's raw sharpening at the default 25% level but push it up a bit to maybe 50% if I'm going to print the photo. I always set the threshold setting to around 5 pixels to avoid sharpening , and therefore adding to, any noise. The noise reduction defaults to 25% colour but I usually change that, lower for low iso or maybe up to 30% for iso 1600 or higher. I also adjust Chroma NR if necessary. I then convert to jpeg for web display, or tiff for printing. The reason for using tiff for printing is that you can tell Photoshop to use 16 bit colour and utilise the full colour gradation of the raw file which will be 12 or 14 bit per primary colour (36 or 42 bit total). Jpeg is only 8 bit per primary colour, i.e. 24 bit total. Most monitors and graphics cards are only 24 bit anyway.

I don't apply any further sharpening to the tiff file as I've already done it in the raw image. I do not sharpen the converted jpeg initially, but resize it to 800 pixels at the longer side then apply the basic sharpening tool once. I then check that there are no halo effects on high contrast boundaries. If there are then I back off the sharpening and try USM with a fine pitch, say 0.8 pixel.

If I still cannot bring out sufficient detail without halos then I may try lassoing relevant parts of the image away from and inside contrast boundaries and applying just a little sharpening within the lasso. This works quite well for feather detail for birds, but isn't so good for butterflies because the boundary between sharpened and unsharpened can be easily spotted.

Above all, don't be tempted to oversharpen as in doing so you can destroy an otherwise good shot.

[Denise]

Hi Mike,
I'm going to have to hire you out one day, so that you can sit at the computer with me and explain all this processing stuff to me.
As I told you once before, I have tried and failed miserably. I turned last months photo comp entry (which you said was good) into a poor image
I need help.

Cheers
Denise

[JKT]

As far as sharpening goes, I use the following:

USM, 30 pix, 10%, 0 in order to increase local contrast (20-50 pix, 8-12% depending...)
USM, 0,5 pix, 100%, 0 in order to remove the softening by antialias filter (0,5...1,5 pix, 80...150%)

I don't like to use threshold so I DO add some noise. There are some tehniques to avoid that floating around the net though. The term "High pass sharpening" comes to mind ... or was it "Low pass"?

After resizing the picture it is time for another round of sharpening:

USM, 0,2 pix, 200%, 0 (0,2...0,25 pix, 100...250%) Note that there is a huge difference between 0,24 pix and 0,25 pix!

Have fun!

[bugmadmark]

There are clearly some real pros out there and I've a lot to learn. Id be interested to know if the images I uploaded look oversharpened? My son took theseon a basic Fuji pinepix (im suitable impressed!) - but just needed some cropping and sharpening (i think). By the way - what is USM? I couldnt see any other forum discussing on how best to improve quality of butterfly forums so i hope it's ok to do it here? I'm sure there are a lot of us dabbling with programs like Photoshop etc - so all basic advice on how you guys achieve these great images would be most welcomed!

Cheers
Mark

[eccles]

USM is unsharp mask, which is technobabble for sharpening, but is more controllable than basic sharpening as you can set the pixel size as well as the degree of sharpening.

[Markulous]

One of the techniques I've used with some success, as mentioned earlier, is High Pass sharpening (I've actually never used USM). On final sized-for-web image:

In the Layers window, right click the Background to make a Background Copy
Filters, Other, High Pass
Set to between 0.7 and 1.5 (varies tremendously with lens/sharpness of shot as well as your size-for-web)
On window list currently displaying Normal, change to Overlay, Soft or Hard Light
Save for Web (or you'll need to flatten layer)

[ColinC]

If I've shot RAW and low ISO ie noise is under control, then I'll sharpen the raw file using the Digital Photo Professional tool palette. Typically 1-3 on the slider before converting to JPEG. If you've got a good pic then this minimises your workflow. BTW I shoot raw in the faithful picture style setting so no in camera sharpening is applied. I'll also resharpen slightly after resizing and reducing size for web using USM within PS.

If noise is too high (regretfully sometimes the case with 400D raw files even at ISO 200) then I'll convert to JPEG and use the neatimage plugin for PS, with or without masking the butterfly, before sharprning within USM. Settings are as mentionned before.

[bugmadmark]

Thanks Colin. Just trying to learn canons digital photo prof via video training on their US site http://www.usa.canon.com/content/dpp2/index.html. I wonder why the UK site is so naff when it comes to support? Half way through the tutorials so will move on once done.

Thanks
Mark

[eccles]

That's a clever technique Markulous. I've tried it but I keep forgetting the steps needed. I ought to work at it though as I understand a similar method can be used for noise reduction.

[wavelea1]

Sheeeeesh.

Previous corres will have indicated that I too suffer the same probs as others have described on this site and as of yet I haven't fully resolved some of the issues - seems like this could be a good topic for the AGM???? Only be warned it has to be in English as I don't speak technobabble.

Dan - I look forward to meeting you. My Sony DSLR and Sigma lenses take great pics I just struggle to reduce them to a manageable size without just cropping.

Mike