in camera sharpening versus photoshop

[studiocygnet]

I just read this in a Canon EOS Digital Photo Guidebook:

"Set the sharpness to suit your purpose. When shooting photos for prints that you will make by yourself, boosting sharpness when photos are shot will allow you to obtain better results. Setting the sharpness on the camera will produce different results from those achieved using Adobe Photoshop or other image-processing software, where the sharpness is adjusted afterwards.
In contrast, when shooting photos for commercial printing or plate making, it is better not to boost sharpness on the camera. The optimum degree of sharpness depends on the final print size, and this may change before the production process is complete. Therefore, rather than using settings for optimal results for a given print size, it is better to concentrate on producing image data that are the easiest to handle in post-processing."

I had never heard this before. Any opinions on in camera sharpening? Any opinions on sharpening when scanning versus photoshop?

[Daniel Bates]

Shoot RAW and you'll never worry about it...

I use medium sharpness or somthing of the sort (factory default). I sometimes sharpen in PS, sometimes I don't, depending on the sort of lens I used to take the picture.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by studiocygnet

I just read this in a Canon EOS Digital Photo Guidebook:

"Set the sharpness to suit your purpose. When shooting photos for prints that you will make by yourself, boosting sharpness when photos are shot will allow you to obtain better results. Setting the sharpness on the camera will produce different results from those achieved using Adobe Photoshop or other image-processing software, where the sharpness is adjusted afterwards.
In contrast, when shooting photos for commercial printing or plate making, it is better not to boost sharpness on the camera. The optimum degree of sharpness depends on the final print size, and this may change before the production process is complete. Therefore, rather than using settings for optimal results for a given print size, it is better to concentrate on producing image data that are the easiest to handle in post-processing."

I had never heard this before. Any opinions on in camera sharpening? Any opinions on sharpening when scanning versus photoshop?

May I suggest you get and read Fraser's book on sharpening and it will cover this in detail.

Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop CS2 by Bruce Fraser

In camera sharping and shooting JPEG's which it requires is a waste of good photons.

[kenw]

In-camera sharpening is an "all-or-nothing" proposition, meaning it:
1) can't be undone
2) is one-size-fits-all, unadjustable (re: unsharp mask)

don't do it. Sharpening should be the LAST step, especially after resizing; not the 1st.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by kenw

In-camera sharpening is an "all-or-nothing" proposition, meaning it:
1) can't be undone
2) is one-size-fits-all, unadjustable (re: unsharp mask)

don't do it. Sharpening should be the LAST step, especially after resizing; not the 1st.

Actual sharpening should be a series of layered steps with the final sharpening directed at the specific output device the image is targeted for. Different devices require different types of sharpening.

[Wes]

On a semi-related note, how do you guys feel about in-camera NR?

[jeffkohn]

Originally Posted by xmenporsche

On a semi-related note, how do you guys feel about in-camera NR?

It should be avoided for the same reasons as in-camera sharpening should be avoided (when shooting RAW, of course).

[studiocygnet]

I always thought the same thing that most of y'all do, leave it till the end, depending on what you are doing with it. That's why I was surprised that Canon would recommend in-camera instead of Photoshop. Maybe they are just trying to get people to use all of the options in their cameras, and have to justify sharpening by the camera in some circumstances.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by studiocygnet

I always thought the same thing that most of y'all do, leave it till the end, depending on what you are doing with it. That's why I was surprised that Canon would recommend in-camera instead of Photoshop. Maybe they are just trying to get people to use all of the options in their cameras, and have to justify sharpening by the camera in some circumstances.

Not surprising, Canon is writing for the lowest common denominator users.

[Duffy Pratt]

The amount of default sharpening that the Canon cameras do varies with the camera. The Pro series do less sharpening than the 20/30D or Rebel, which in turn do less than the point and shoots.

Duffy

[Glassman]

It could also be possible that if your pictures need a lot of sharpening your camera AF could be off. I think that is also true of a lens or you would never hear "this lens is a good copy." I think thats why a lot of people send their cameras and lens in for cleaning and calibration. Plus all the stuff you guys have already said...

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Glassman

It could also be possible that if your pictures need a lot of sharpening your camera AF could be off. I think that is also true of a lens or you would never hear "this lens is a good copy." I think thats why a lot of people send their cameras and lens in for cleaning and calibration. Plus all the stuff you guys have already said...

Sharpening does nothing for AF issues or lenses. All sharpening does is create a halo of light pixels on edges to give the illusion of resolution. Artist have been doing this at least since El Greco.

People send their lenses in to have the optical path corrected something not addressed by 'sharpening.'

Edge sharpening is needed on digital images not to improve resolution but rather correct for artifacts introduced by Anti-alise filter and the Bayer filter. The very process of digitization of image data mandates sharpening. For details see Fraser's works on Sharpening.