Output Sharpening (Export)

[Souwalker]

How good is the Output sharpening in the Export mode? There is an option to Export to Screen and then 'Standard'.

After I make pp my RAWs, what I normally do is export to jpg because I upload to my smugmug account. I use to use PS's USM to sharpen the save to jpg.

Discovered this option in LR2.3 recently and wondered how good is this output sharpening to screen is at the Standard quality.

Rgds
Patrick

 

[Sean McCormack]

I use it all the time and am happy with it.

It's resolution dependent, which I like, so the sharpening is appropriate for the output size you choose.

Try output 4 images at a number of sizes: No sharpening, low, standard and high. See what you think.

 

[Souwalker]

I use it all the time and am happy with it.

It's resolution dependent, which I like, so the sharpening is appropriate for the output size you choose.

Try output 4 images at a number of sizes: No sharpening, low, standard and high. See what you think.

Thanks Sean.

When you say resolution dependent, what do you mean? When I export I choose 3''ppi and I do not resize to fit.

Rgds
Pat

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Pat, as Sean has mentioned you would be best to have a play. Each person will have their own preference.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Filling in for Sean, because he tends to spread himself pretty thin. He can correct me, if I get his meaning wrong.

By resolution, I'm sure he means the overall pixel dimensions of the image. So that an image of 4'''x6''' pixels is sharpened differently from a web sized copy of the same photo at 8''x12'', when intended for the same output device. The sharpening algorithms are provided by the folks at Pixel Genius, the makers of Photo Kit Sharpener.

The concept of ppi/dpi applied to an image is a polite fiction, and in this context has no real meaning. Search this (or any photo related) forum for endless discussion of the topic.

 

[Souwalker]

Filling in for Sean, because he tends to spread himself pretty thin. He can correct me, if I get his meaning wrong.

By resolution, I'm sure he means the overall pixel dimensions of the image. So that an image of 4'''x6''' pixels is sharpened differently from a web sized copy of the same photo at 8''x12'', when intended for the same output device. The sharpening algorithms are provided by the folks at Pixel Genius, the makers of Photo Kit Sharpener.

The concept of ppi/dpi applied to an image is a polite fiction, and in this context has no real meaning. Search this (or any photo related) forum for endless discussion of the topic.

I use a 4'D and I shoot RAW but I cannot remember the image size. Need to check but I do not resize when I export to jpg in LR.

 

[Brad Snyder]

That's fine, as Sean said, the software will apply the appropriate sharpening based on the overall pixel dimensions (cropped) and the output medium, as modified by your sharpening amount setting. This will be comparable in either export, or print to file.

The 4'D is approx 26''x39'' native resolution.

As Geoff said, (as we simulposted in response to your question) this ends up being a personal preference. Some folks are happy with various settings in Lr, others feel they need more buttons to twiddle, or need different results, so the use third party products with Lr or Photoshop.

Every sharpening thread ends up the same, most people give vague numeric suggestions, and then say, "Experiment, and find your own sweet spot".

If you're not already familiar with the topic, there's a very good read here: Bruce Frasier - A sharpening workflow That workflow philosophy is what Lr attempts to implement.

 

[Souwalker]

That's fine, as Sean said, the software will apply the appropriate sharpening based on the overall pixel dimensions (cropped) and the output medium, as modified by your sharpening amount setting. This will be comparable in either export, or print to file.

The 4'D is approx 26''x39'' native resolution.

As Geoff said, (as we simulposted in response to your question) this ends up being a personal preference. Some folks are happy with various settings in Lr, others feel they need more buttons to twiddle, or need different results, so the use third party products with Lr or Photoshop.

Every sharpening thread ends up the same, most people give vague numeric suggestions, and then say, "Experiment, and find your own sweet spot".

If you're not already familiar with the topic, there's a very good read here: Bruce Frasier - A sharpening workflow That workflow philosophy is what Lr attempts to implement.

Thanks Brad

I am familiar with the topic but I read it again

Just me thinking out loud. As LR already have some default capture sharpening done to a RAW file and if I do not opt for output sharpening as part of the export jpg flow, my jpg will be sharpened with what the default capture sharpenng settings was? Same outcome if I did some creative sharpening, and then LR to export to jpg with no output sharpening selected, the jpg will be exported with my creative sharpening levels?

Rgds
Pat

 

[fware]

I ONLY use it if I re-size my images and I like it. That is why I have a LR 2.x as this was missing from 1.x and it's great.

If I export my RAW( CR2/DNG) in full size I normally do NOT enable this feature.

If I export smaler versions for the web or printing service I use it all the time.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Pat, yes, your assumptions in the last paragraph are correct.

The default capture sharpening is intended to be the Phase 1 correction for digital 'softness'. The local brush sharpening, combined with artistic changes to the global Develop module sharpening panel is intended to be the Phase 2 creative sharpening. The export module Phase 3 is intended to match the intents of the first 2 phases to the actual output device/mechanism/real life.

Now, does that mean your capture and creative sharpening is included in the conversion, even when export sharpening is disabled? Yes. Does it mean that it will result in the print you wanted? Hard to say, without actually trying it. It's intended to be a 'system', and that approach omits a part of the system.

Hence all the recommendations to 'try it and see for yourself'.

Generally, in my event shooting, which tends to be scene/captured moment driven, as opposed to technique driven, I'll go with the capture defaults and the standard export sharpening for the intended output medium. In fewer than 5%, I'll tweak the defaults or try some local sharpening. Should I lose my mind and wander off in 'artiste' mode, then, who knows?

 

[Replytoken]

The concept of ppi/dpi applied to an image is a polite fiction...

Well stated, Brad. Can this be pinned somewhere? Most preferable in the cubicle of the programmer who decided to include this input box in Lightroom! :cheesy: IMHO, this "setting" causes more confusion than its worth, especially to new LR users. I will get off of my soapbox now and return to my regularly scheuled day.

--Ken

 

[Mark Sirota]

Well stated, Brad. Can this be pinned somewhere? Most preferable in the cubicle of the programmer who decided to include this input box in Lightroom! :cheesy: IMHO, this "setting" causes more confusion than its worth, especially to new LR users. I will get off of my soapbox now and return to my regularly scheuled day.

Hey, that's my soapbox!

(Actually, quite glad to have you aboard.)

I wouldn't pin any blame on the LR team. The real blame lies with Photoshop, which places far more emphasis on PPI/DPI than is deserved, as well as countless third parties who either insist quite meaninglessly that images should be presented to them at a particular PPI/DPI, or that they present images at a particular PPI/DPI. And they usually use DPI when they mean PPI, or vice-versa.

I did propose at one point to the LR team that the PPI box in the Export dialog should be grayed out or omitted unless the resize box is checked and the units are inches or cm (as opposed to pixels). But it was pointed out to me that they need something to stick in the metadata no matter what, and it's better to ask than to make something up.

 

[Replytoken]

Hey, that's my soapbox!

(Actually, quite glad to have you aboard.)

... and it's better to ask than to make something up.

Its good to be aboard with company, and since when was it better to ask than to make things up? Oh wait, that's how we got into this global financial mess in the first place! :mrgreen:

Actually, having cut my digital teeth with Picture Window Pro, I found the whole Photoshop PPI/DPI thing kind of strange. PWP was wonderful at preparing the files for printing at the time, so all I cared about was resolution. Or to quote an audio salesman that I knew in the late 7''s, "Some is good, more is better, and too much is just enough!"

Take care,

--Ken

 

[Brad Snyder]

Or to quote an audio salesman that I knew in the late 7''s, "Some is good, more is better, and too much is just enough!"

OT, but I can't resist. I've heard my father say the exact same thing about Vodka Martinis.