Jump to content

Google Nik Collection has helped with sharpening my Fuji files in Lightroom.


val

Recommended Posts

Nik Collection is now free.

 

I wasn't using Lightroom very much with my Fuji files since the performance was laggy and the sharpness just looked off no matter the methods I tried.

So I installed Nik collection and I use the Sharpener Pro 3: RAW Output (right click your image and put your move over EDIT IN in the Develop module). It then creates a .TIFF file to be edited.

 

Now I don't get mushy grass and the files react more like other camera RAW files.

Here are 100% crops below

 

Nik Collection Sharpness at what it sharpens to by default.26015824592_61b5c192ec_h.jpg
 

Lightroom Sharpness with Amount: 25, Radius: 1.0, Detail: 100 and Masking at 0

25503603094_838fde0ea4_h.jpg

 

Also, since the files are now .TIFF, Lightroom handles them faster than it does with .RAF (on my machine anyway) The biggest negative with this is the extra HDD it eats up. Until Adobe release the fine detail update, I will be editing this way however.

Get it here https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

Edit: I forgot to show the full image.

 

25835668460_3f589a7d72_h.jpg

Edited by val
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems a bit more saturated and the lines are better defined.. but marginal.. still not the results i expect for a raw converter

 

EDIT: ok, i tried it by myself and i have to change my opinion.. it is alot! better than LR.. very good

Edited by Cysco
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... It's just my own opinion but the results look very artificial (like 90% of the shared production nowadays).

By the way, developing X-trans RAW with the last version of LR looks better than before and sharpness is enough for me.

And don't forget that "sharpness" is also a personal perception and a part of subjective aesthetic. Being satisfied yourself of your own job is the most important. :)

Edited by Fredkelder
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

With one exception, I have found that for me doing anything sharpening other than default LR has a significant probability of doing more harm than good.  Keep in mind that I'm judging this based on 12'x18" prints which are start out much sharper and detailed than what appears on a monitor.  My main objection is visible artifacts from unsharp mask and similar processes.

 

The one exception is the Topaz Labs "Detail" plug-in.  I have no technical explanation but "Detain" when used cautiously can do as much sharpening as I require with no sign of artifacts.  (Note the word "cautiously" -- get heavy handed with the sliders and it can make a spectacular mess.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've tried several strategies to sharpen Fuji files (Nik included), and several raw developer softwares.

 

So far, the less-artificial results I'm getting are from one of the following two approaches. They are interchangeable up to a point, but each works marginally bests with a specific kind of image. Basically, the RawTherapee approach seem to like better images with very fine detail (a meadow in the distance), while the Clarity approach is more suited for images with bolder detail (a meadow up close, with the blades of grass clearly visible).

 

BTW, I might be dumb or blind ;) but I seriously can't see Irident making much of a difference enough to justify disrupting my LR based workflow (and yes, I've tried all the possible sharpening combinations). The only exception being its upscaling algorithms that seem to be really better than PS or LR ones.

 

 

RawTherapee

 

- first I take care of the “normal" settings appropriate for each image, so white balance, exposure etc., even though usually the image will look good straight from the start; remember, I'm saving the big edits for LR

 
- this is the good part: for sharpening, I select “RL Deconvolution” with the following (indicative, are image dependent) values
            Radius = 66
            Amount = 100
            Damping = 20
            Iterations = 100
 
- finally I select (the small icon on the top left of the panel, resembling an “off” button) “Microcontrast” at its default value

I think I'll use this method only for the very best images and/or the ones that need a fair amount of enlargement.

 

 

Clarity

 

This is a all-in-Lighroom approach. 

 

Many people using LR or PS are relying on the "Bridgewood method": http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/ basically a low radius - high detail approach.

 
To me the files sharpened this way often look though either too crunchy or too soft.
 
Instead I use a fairly conservative (for X-trans sensors) set of values in the Lightroom sharpening panel:
 
Amount = 35 to 45
Radius = 1 to 1.4
Details = 40 to 60
Masking = as needed to clear areas with low/no detail, but usually at least around 10
 
Obviously the exact values will depend by how fine the details are in the actual image, the amount of detail in general etc.
 
To this I will then add a ton of "Clarity" (even 100% if the image is really detailed, like some underwood shots), decreasing "Contrast" as needed (even -100% in some rare case) until the image looks good.
 
This leaves you with images than even at 100% magnification resemble a lot a good medium format 4.5x6cm slide film scan, and that will sharpen beautifully in Photoshop for printing purposes (with the sharpening obviously based on printing media and size).
 
My 2 cents
Link to post
Share on other sites

Addicted,

Which version of LR do you use? How critical is the version?  I am on 4.4. 

 

 

I use LR 6.5.1 (Camera Raw 9.5.1).

 

But I'm seeing no discernible difference in the way it renders Fuji files against Photoshop CS6 (Camera Raw 9.1.1.461), so my guess is not that much version dependent. 

 

Please keep in mind that my rule of thumb when selecting lenses, softwares etc. is that if I can't spot a meaningful difference in a few seconds than whatever difference there is it's not wort the hassle of changing workflow or the price difference for a more expensive piece of glass. Others may have different opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use LR 6.5.1 (Camera Raw 9.5.1).

 

But I'm seeing no discernible difference in the way it renders Fuji files against Photoshop CS6 (Camera Raw 9.1.1.461), so my guess is not that much version dependent. 

 

Please keep in mind that my rule of thumb when selecting lenses, softwares etc. is that if I can't spot a meaningful difference in a few seconds than whatever difference there is it's not wort the hassle of changing workflow or the price difference for a more expensive piece of glass. Others may have different opinions.

 

That is all that needs to be said on the topic. I've been using Lightroom for nearly a decade now. I tried to like Capture One. But why change a system and workflow that works for you, if the end result is only visible when pixel peeping the same image side by side anyway?

 

 

Clarity

 

This is a all-in-Lighroom approach. 

 

Many people using LR or PS are relying on the "Bridgewood method": http://petebridgwood.com/wp/2014/10/x-trans-sharpening/ basically a low radius - high detail approach.

 
To me the files sharpened this way often look though either too crunchy or too soft.
 
Instead I use a fairly conservative (for X-trans sensors) set of values in the Lightroom sharpening panel:
 
Amount = 35 to 45
Radius = 1 to 1.4
Details = 40 to 60
Masking = as needed to clear areas with low/no detail, but usually at least around 10
 
Obviously the exact values will depend by how fine the details are in the actual image, the amount of detail in general etc.
 
To this I will then add a ton of "Clarity" (even 100% if the image is really detailed, like some underwood shots), decreasing "Contrast" as needed (even -100% in some rare case) until the image looks good.

 

I have good results with the following, but then again, I thoroughly dislike oversharpened images anyway, since that's what usually is a dead giveaway that it's a digital image, compared to a film/analog picture.

 

I tend to stick more or less to this, unless the image really needs a kick, in which case I'll add extra sharpening on top in Photoshop.

Amount: 35-45

Radius: 0.7

Detail: 70

Masking: 0-40

And clarity, depending on the image, but I try to keep it below 40-50 ish. Usually only 10-20 for that extra bump.

Link to post
Share on other sites

funny how when it comes to lenses or cameras ( I need 24MP, 16MP is so passé ! Yesterdays sensor! :blink: )  most people here want the sharpest possible for the budget available and when it comes to software if one wants the sharpest possible and dares talking about it then one, all of a sudden, is ear marked a pixel peeper.

 

:rolleyes:

Edited by milandro
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...