What's new
Photoshop Gurus Forum

Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Sharpening Batch


John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Hi

I want to do an automate batch in Photoshop using raw files. Is there a way of doing this without being stopped to ask to open each individual raw file? I need to keep the files raw as I will need to then "start" editing them in Lightroom.... thanks...

John
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Once you change the pixels in an image, it is, by definition, no longer a raw image. To preserve the integrity of the original image, for safety, Adobe has decided that no changes (such as sharpening the data) will ever be written back into any raw file.

That being said, since you are already using LR, you can effectively do the same thing by a very simple procedure in LR. In the first step, you set the sharpening parameters for one image in your set. You then synchronize just that one setting (sharpening) with all the other images in that set. Now, when you view any of these images in LR, they will all be sharpened by the same amount. The data in the raw files have not been changed (ie, sharpened), but the instructions for doing so in LR has been recorded and will be applied when the image is viewed or exported.

In the second step, while continuing to work in LR, you go over each of the images in the set, one-by-one, making other corrections/adjustments. These instructions will be added to the instruction to sharpen each raw image, so that when you view or export any of them, you will see what you asked for: sharpening PLUS your other changes.

HTH,

Tom M
 

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Once you change the pixels in an image, it is, by definition, no longer a raw image. To preserve the integrity of the original image, for safety, Adobe has decided that no changes (such as sharpening the data) will ever be written back into any raw file.

That being said, since you are already using LR, you can effectively do the same thing by a very simple procedure in LR. In the first step, you set the sharpening parameters for one image in your set. You then synchronize just that one setting (sharpening) with all the other images in that set. Now, when you view any of these images in LR, they will all be sharpened by the same amount. The data in the raw files have not been changed (ie, sharpened), but the instructions for doing so in LR has been recorded and will be applied when the image is viewed or exported.

In the second step, while continuing to work in LR, you go over each of the images in the set, one-by-one, making other corrections/adjustments. These instructions will be added to the instruction to sharpen each raw image, so that when you view or export any of them, you will see what you asked for: sharpening PLUS your other changes.

HTH,

Tom M


Hi Tom

Thanks for your reply. The problem is - that I find sharpening in Photoshop a lot better than in Lightroom. I have changed the Lightroom sharpening parameters lots of times but cannot get the same level of sharpening that I do in Photoshop! Hence the desire to do a batch sharpen in Photoshop first before returning to work in Lightroom - if that makes sense? Thanks...

John
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
I hope I'm not preaching to the choir, but I assume you know that one should not / can not get the best sharpening results unless you apply a relatively small amount of initial sharpening (eg, using the "Details" tab in LR), and then again when you resize the image for final output (eg, using the "Output Sharpening" section of the Export dialog box in LR). If you try to get all the sharpening you need in one step (say, using only the "Details" section of the develop module in LR), the results will likely be less than satisfactory. This might be the problem that you encountered.

BTW, in the preceding paragraph, I gave examples based on a purely LR workflow, but the exact same principle is used if you are working in PS.

The two step sharpening approach I described above is part of a more general three step sharpening process that has become essentially the de-factor standard among pro and hi-end amateur photographers. You can read about it here:

https://www.photoshopgurus.com/foru...ening-technique-portraits.html#post1533637536

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/image-sharpening.htm

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...mp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B002NQSMWW

If you are already know all about the above, just ignore the above comments and, if you feel like it, describe exactly how sharpening in LR disappoints you and/or what procedures you use in PS to obtain a better effect. For example, if you find that you often need to use the anti-shake sharpener (new in PS CC, but not yet available in LR), or if you are going to a 3rd party plugin like Focus Magic, then you certainly have a good reason to go to PS, but, IMHO, 90% of all decently shot photos don't need this and can be handled quite well (from a sharpening POV) in LR.

Tom
 

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Hi Tom

Thanks so much for taking the time to reply. Sorry for the slow response but I have been away on holiday :) Thanks also for the links which I have looked at.

It's hard to describe without showing an example but in a nutshell I use "unsharp mask" in Photoshop (Amount 24, Radius 9.4 and Threshold 3) and it just seems to give a decent clarity. No matter what setting I try in Lightroom it seems to not be so effective! Any further thoughts. To be honest I want to keep it as simple as possible as I have such a high number of images in my workflow.....

John
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Hi John -

Great to hear from you again! I hope you had a nice holiday.

Sharpening is something that I have maintained an interest in for many years, so I would be very interested in pursuing this. However, to be honest, without an example, it's difficult to talk about this in the abstract.

So, would you consider posting one of your original, straight-from-the-camera raw files + what the image looks like after your r=9 USM step?

If you don't want to post the entire image for reasons of either privacy or file size, you could just post a cropped version, so long as that area contains a representative sample of some important (and some minor) edges, some areas with texture, some smooth areas, etc.

Cheers,

Tom

PS - BTW, the forum file uploader software doesn't especially like NEF, CR2, xmp, and PSD files, so if you do decide to post an example, just zip everything together. The uploading software works well with zip files.
 

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Hi Tom

Thanks again - would be more than happy to upload an example. Struggling to upload. Would I be right in thinking jpeg versions would defeat the purpose?
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Yup, only the original raw file will provide the necessary starting pt.

A jpg would be fine, tho, to show your final result. So we r comparing apples to apples, if I get anything useful to show u, I would also post it in the form of a jpg.

Tom
 

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
OK - sorry it has to be jpegs... The first image is saved without anything (except re-sizing to enable upload) and the second image the same except unsharp mask has been applied. When I try in Lightroom I can't quite find the level of clarity and sharpness that unsharp offers....


Boys 2014 Alnmouth-14-Edit.jpgBoys 2014 Alnmouth-14-Edit - Unsharp Mask.jpg
 
Last edited:

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Hi John - Unfortunately, without the raw data file, I simply can't illustrate the "all LR" approach I suggested as an alternative. It just doesn't work after the initial adjustments to the RAW data have been baked in by conversion to a JPG.

What's the problem? Maybe I can help?

Tom
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Hi again, John -

Although one can not possibly do as well trying to sharpen a JPG compared to sharpening a RAW file, attached is a demo that shows that one can get a good bit of the way there sharpening your unsharpened JPG using LR 5.6. I zipped three files together so there is no way the files might be modified by the forum's rather crude (when it comes to compressing) file uploading software. The three files in the zip are:

1 = no USM by you; no LR sharpening or other changes by me;
2 = USM by you; no changes made my me;
3 = no USM by you; I sharpened #1 using LR 5.6 using the settings shown in the attached screen shot.

As can be seen, there is a huge difference between #1 and either #2 or #3, but much a smaller difference between #2 and #3. To my eye, the primary difference between #2 and #3 is that the very brightest and very darkest tones are not sharpened as much. This is typical of the difference between sharpening a RAW file vs attempting to sharpen the corresponding JPG.

Should you be able to upload the corresponding raw file, I'll be happy to have a go at that, as well.

Cheers,

Tom

PS - For what it's worth, over the years, I've participated in dozens of threads about sharpening ( ... mostly on photo.net), and read (but did not participate in) many hundreds more. Using the terminology of the 3 step sharpening method that I mentioned earlier, I've seen general agreement about the advantages of doing the middle "creative" sharpening step in PS instead of LR, but I've never seen anyone complain about the quality of LR's initial sharpening step, "intake sharpening", which is what this discussion is about. For example, I'm quite sure I've never seen anyone before this feel that there was a need to bring images back into LR after processing in PS. The workflow is *always* (...including many, many pros) LR to PS, and then, on limited occasions back into LR to make use of LR's facilities to produce a slide show, a PDR or Blub book, HTML for a quick web gallery, contact sheets, etc.
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Arghhh ... sorry ... I hit the send key before I attached the files I discussed in my previous post. Here they are...

Tom
 

Attachments

  • comparison_of_PS_USM-vs-LR-sharpening.zip
    1.4 MB · Views: 0
  • LR_v5p6_sharpening_and_NR_settings.jpg
    LR_v5p6_sharpening_and_NR_settings.jpg
    67.8 KB · Views: 13

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Hi

The raw file was very big. When I sent it zipped it took a long time (40 minutes or so) and then just disappeared rather than uploading - no error message.
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Ahh. Now I understand what the hangup was.

For some reason, I've been lucky and never had the problem (even with the huge files from a d800), but others have run into this. I'm not sure why.

Instead of uploading it here, why don't you use Dropbox, and I can pick it up from there.

Tom
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Sorry, John, but a TIF file is just not the same as a raw file. Raw files contain the actual raw data from each individual R, G, and B photosensor in the camera, essentially untouched (...just packaged in a wrapper with some header info).

In contrast, the data in a TIF file (or any other conventional image file, eg, JPG, PNG, PSD, etc.) is the result of applying numerous mathematical operations to the raw data. These operations always include de-mosaicing (converting the triangular Bayer pattern of the physically spatially separate R, G, and B photosensor elements into a rectangular grid of pixels with all three colors overlaid on each pixel), and almost always include application of photosensor-by-photosensor NR, application of separate sensor response (calibration) curves, an overall gamma like curve, sharpening, anti-aliasing, etc.

After these data manipulations are performed and a TIF (or PSD or JPG is written), the changes are said to be "baked in", because they can't be undone -- you are stuck with them.

If you want me to demo what LR (or ACR) can really do, I need to start with the actual raw data.

Tom

PS - BTW, in case you have never seen all of the adjustments that typically get "baked in" when a raw file is converted to a standard image file, below is a screen grab from a really geeky raw converter program called "Raw Therapee". I only opened up a fraction of the adjustment groups, but it should give you an idea of how much is hidden under the hood by the simpler interfaces in LR and ACR. In the Adobe programs, Adobe has made decisions about most of these parameters, leaving only a fraction of them for the user to adjust. After conversion to a TIF or PSD file, you can't adjust *any* of them.
 

Tom Mann

Guru
Messages
7,223
Likes
4,343
Whoops - I just realized that I forgot to attach the screen grab that I mentioned. Here it is:
 

Attachments

  • Some_of_the_raw_conversion_parameters_that_get_baked_in.jpg
    Some_of_the_raw_conversion_parameters_that_get_baked_in.jpg
    133.6 KB · Views: 0

John Anderosn

Member
Messages
10
Likes
0
Wow - I still have a lot to learn!!! The apologies are all mine. OK will get back onto it when I am back in the office! Again thanks for your patience......
 

Top