NIK Sharpener and Genuine Fractals

[Angelo]

Need some advice.
I am planning on purchasing NIK Sharpener and Genuine Fractals as a bundle for $329.00

Does anyone have any experience with either of these two products?

Thanks,
Angelo

[johnastovall]

Don't know about NIK Sharpener but use and like GF very much for upsizing.

[Detonate]

I use NIK Sharpener, and I love it.

However, it's canned sharpening can be pretty brutal on anything but edges.

What I do is I have an Action called "Begin Edit"
It makes two duplicates of the background layer, calling one "Smooth" and one "Sharp"
Then runs a Digital Airbrush on the smooth layer and adds a layer mask.
I then paint out the Hair, Eyes, Lips, Clothing, fairly loosly, not worrying too much about accuracy.
Then I apply the Nik Sharpener to the Sharp layer.

Works very well for me.

[lacomb-roach_press]

Genuine Fractals works very well for me. They recommend usind GF for enlargements up to 400%, then using PS bicubic to go larger if necessary. I sometimes finish off with a bit of Noise Ninja on specific areas (via layer masking) or slight sharpening. I regularly print 22 x 33 off of D2x jpg files, and print on Epson 7600.

[CobyPhoto]

Jim,

I would love to hear a little more about the sharpening method you use. I have NIK sharpener and agree with you completely. Out of the box NIK Sharpener is a little harsh.

Thanks!

Coby

[digitaldooda]

I have had success with Genuine Fractals.

[jeffkohn]

Hope you haven't already purchased. IMHO that bundle is overpriced, and even if it wasn't there are better tools out there I think.

For capture sharpening, I prefer good 'ol USM on the L-channel of a duplicate layer in LAB mode with high amount and very small radius. This tends to really bring out the fine details without over-exaggerating high-contrast edges. It doesn't work well for all images (such as portraits), in which case I'll use Focal Blade (still on the L-channel of a dupe layer though).

For creative and output sharpening, I use Focal Blade as I've found it gives excellent results and is extremely flexible, with more control over the process than other tools I've tried.

For interpolation for printing, I've been using a Bicubic up/down method that's described in this article. In my testing it worked better than Genuine Fractals. Having said that, I find this DPReview thread interesting, and will be giving SAR a try for some upcoming printing. At $25, SAR is an absolute bargain compared to GF or Photozoom, and if the results are as good as this one test would indicate it's a no-brainer choice. Here's the homepage for SAR, and here's a pretty interesting comparison of the various methods.

[Angelo]

Thank you Jeff. No, I have not purchased them yet.
I will check out your recommendations first.

[digitaldooda]

Thanks for sharing...input is always welcome. Technology moves so fast and there is such an abundance of information....Like the blind leading the blind. Thanks for shedding light. If I've learned anything it is that there is so much more to learn.

Vickie