174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
Sat, Apr 16, 2011 11:21 PM
8
Lightroom: Stronger, more flexible sharpening.
I find Lightroom's sharpening Strength (limited Amount) and Flexibility (single radius) insufficient.
I'm attaching two screen shots comparing LR to Aperture as means of example.
The first is the After result. As you can see on the right, in LR I have the amount maxed out at radius 1.3 with no masking or NR applied. On the left, Aperture allows me to stack additional doses for greater effect. Attempts to do similar with the Brush tool in LR are ineffective. I suspect there is no getting above Amount=150 by any means. Note that Aperture also allows sharpening at multiple radii. They also include an Edge Sharpen function that I've barely even explored yet. The strength, combinations and possibilities are staggering.
Can we get similar in LR?
And lest one think the effect might be of starting at a point of greater Clarity or Contrast in Aperture, the second shot shows the settings all kept as they were but with Sharpening turned off.


I'm attaching two screen shots comparing LR to Aperture as means of example.
The first is the After result. As you can see on the right, in LR I have the amount maxed out at radius 1.3 with no masking or NR applied. On the left, Aperture allows me to stack additional doses for greater effect. Attempts to do similar with the Brush tool in LR are ineffective. I suspect there is no getting above Amount=150 by any means. Note that Aperture also allows sharpening at multiple radii. They also include an Edge Sharpen function that I've barely even explored yet. The strength, combinations and possibilities are staggering.
Can we get similar in LR?
And lest one think the effect might be of starting at a point of greater Clarity or Contrast in Aperture, the second shot shows the settings all kept as they were but with Sharpening turned off.


Ideas
•
Updated
10 years ago
1
21
8
Helpful Widget
How can we improve?
Tags
flexibility
control
Responses
lee_jay_fingersh
946 Messages
•
13.8K Points
10 years ago
Also, LR does use multiple radii, it just does it automatically.
0
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
Because, IMO, it causes more digital artifacting than it's worth. Use detail in LR then add additional sharpening in PS (which I often find necessary) and you'll see the unpleasant effect.
"Also, LR does use multiple radii, it just does it automatically. "
As a matter of intellectual curiosity I'd love to hear more about this, but it doesn't lessen my wish for increased strength, flexibility and control.
2
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
1
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
That may be, but that's how I like to "dial in" the right amount, by exceeding it and then backing down. It's an approach I don't get to take as often as I'd like to for sharpening in LR.
0
0
geoff_walker_2225610
Champion
•
221 Messages
•
4.1K Points
10 years ago
0
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
One can easily back down from too much, but when max is not enough you've got to go outside the program.
I don't see people settling for insufficient control over exposure, contrast, hue, saturation, etc, so why settle for a relatively (compared to the competition, if nothing else) paltry amount of sharpening? I don't hear Aperture and Capture One users asking their developers to reduce the amount of sharpening available. One wants "too much," there might be times they can use it.
7
geoff_walker_2225610
Champion
•
221 Messages
•
4.1K Points
10 years ago
I can see merit in what you are asking for!!
0
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
Sharpening: 60/1/25/30
L-NR: 30/75/0
C-NR: 10/75
Then export the image without resizing and with export sharpening set to screen-standard. Then look at that image. "
Thanks for that Lee Jay, and I fully respect the travails of suggesting numbers without having the image to play with. Attached I show the result on the left in PS compared to LR with the Detail panel turned off.
My feelings: at 100% view I actually prefer the unsharpened version on the right because of how much I dislike the artifacting created by the Detail slider. It's not a good tradeoff, IMO.
At reduced viewing sizes I'd prefer even more sharpening. I'd like a higher Amount (without the detail artifacts) with some masking, and NR only if needed, and/or applied selectively to the non-detailed areas. I'd love the ability to apply NR to the inverse of the sharpening mask. Might be wrong for some applications, but for instance it'd be nice to apply sharpening to diamond edges and NR to the smooth metals. I'd settle for painting my own masks, but it does no good if I can't progressively exceed an amount I already find insufficient.
0
0
rob_cole_2221866
4.5K Messages
•
76.3K Points
10 years ago
I now understand your comment in the other thread (about having had enough...) (this is my first viewing of this thread).
I gave this FR my vote - two thumbs up...
I definitely would like more control over sharpening, specifically the ability to have local pins with different detail and radius, and even masking too, although that would be secondary.
Although I've never needed an amount greater than 150 myself, I have no objection to raising it for those who would use it. And, I have cranked it all the way up a time or two.
PS - the gems are a perfect example of a case where detail really should be zero - no textural detail sharpening of the flat surfaces whatsoever. And in fact, it would be an example where substantial noise reduction to take away detail might be in order - its all about the hard edges...
PPS - Have you tried setting output sharpening to 'High'? (since you seem to like things sharpened more than average...)
Rob
0
0
rob_cole_2221866
4.5K Messages
•
76.3K Points
10 years ago
I now understand your comment in the other thread (about having had enough...) (this is my first viewing of this thread).
I gave this FR my vote - two thumbs up...
I definitely would like more control over sharpening, specifically the ability to have local pins with different detail and radius, and even masking too, although that would be secondary.
Although I've never needed an amount greater than 150 myself, I have no objection to raising it for those who would use it. And, I have cranked it all the way up a time or two.
PS - the gems are a perfect example of a case where detail really should be zero - no textural detail sharpening of the flat surfaces whatsoever. And in fact, it would be an example where substantial noise reduction to take away detail might be in order - its all about the hard edges...
PPS - Have you tried setting output sharpening to 'High'? (since you seem to like things sharpened more than average...)
PPPS - I think Adobe set 150 as the maximum because its at the limit of the algorithm - more than that and the algorithm starts to fall apart (quality of result starts to decline). I agree with Lee Jay on this point: If you need greater than 150, you probably need a different algorithm, e.g. deconvolution - maybe a good idea for a separate thread. I use Focus Magic too if its really "out of focus", Topaz Labs came up with a competing product recently too, but unlike Topaz other products - its not very good.
Truth betold, I would prefer to see sharpness fall-off correction over a general deconvolution feature or the like, since its a frequent occurrence to see wide angle shots that are sharp in the center but decrease in sharpness toward the edges. If something is really out of focus, the delete key usually fixes it, or focus magic, or Photoshop... - sorry for getting a tad off-topic.
Rob
0
0
photographe
242 Messages
•
9.1K Points
10 years ago
If sharpening in LR is meant to be capture sharpening, then that explains a lot. Capture sharpening is meant to be just the minimum amount required to compensate for the AA filter. Less is more when it comes to capture sharpening.
That makes the omission of creatie sharpening poignant.
Also, I maintain that more control over output sharpening, along with an ability to preview, would be welcome. In theory, output sharpening would depend on the output media and the size of the print.
2
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
Aperture, Capture One, and Leaf Capture, provide "industrial strength" sharpening. I suspect the same for the slew of Raw converters I've yet to try.
LR provides "capture sharpening".
1
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
And just so you know...this *is* that other thread. ;-)
0
0
rob_cole_2221866
4.5K Messages
•
76.3K Points
10 years ago
0
0
scott_mahn
174 Messages
•
3.8K Points
10 years ago
The other converters have their version of Clarity too. But really, I can do Clarity in PS too, and if the concept is to use LR minimally with the expectation of doing anything "creative" in PS, why draw the line at sharpening, lets make all the tools tepid.
3
0