Jump to content

Sharpening in LR5 vs LR6


Recommended Posts

I recently upgraded my LR version from 5 to 6 (6.8 and CR 9.8) and noticed that my sharpening looks awful. I added presets from here that drive the detail slider to 100%:

https://www.lightwith.me/sharpening-and-fujifilms-x-trans-sensor/

 

Has anyone noticed this as well? Still using my X-E2 and shooting RAW like always, but just about any sharpening starts to look like a mosaic at 100% zoom.

 

Any tips?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My tip would be - stop using Adobe... Thay cannot provide good tools for Fuji users.

 

You guys really need to stop saying sh*t like that. It's not useful or helpful to ANYONE. At all.   LR works just fine.  It's a matter of what sharpening to use.  I've been a LR user since BETA 1.0.  And have been using it with my Fuji files since 2013.  Also, I've used LR going back to 2007 on my Fujifilm S1, and S2 Pro dSLR bodies shooting RAF files as well.

 

Please provide some constructive help.  Like:  Hey fella, go check out Pete Bridgewoods blog.  He has an outstanding post on sharpening raf files there that took my stock images from an abysmal acceptance rate of around 86% when I stopped using my Nikons, and switched to Fuji,  up to 98% of images submitted--All Fuji.  As a matter of fact, here are TWO links from his website on sharpening raw files:  Go here, for X-T2 and X-Pro2 files.    And go to this blog post for the X-T1 and X-Pro1 raw files.

 

Hope this helps. 

Edited by jlmphotos
Link to post
Share on other sites

See my other post here regarding this topic.

Thanks for the information and links.

 

I've been asking myself these questions a lot recently but in all the research I have done I have to conclude that this topic is entirely subjective and there is no one definitive answer. Whilst one tool may produce sharper images, another may produce better colours. The best tool isn't the one that creates the sharpest images or best colour depth, it's the one that helps you produce the best, or most pleasing, images and makes you the most productive. Each tool can compensate for it's deficiencies through some (minor?) manual control.

Edited by berryp
Link to post
Share on other sites

Torturro, what good alternatives would you suggest, or have had good experiences with?

 

I just experimented with Irident And ON1, jus because I was terrified of some results that Adobe CRaw gave me. Im in the middle of raw developing of 4k pictures. Im so tired of looking at worms and watercolours....

For Mac users - Id reccomend taking a close look at ON1 and for Windows - ad Irident x transformer (producing dng files) + using LR/PS as usuall.

 

Also - both those platforms are not problems free - I must say - I find PShop Built in CameraRaw workflow very easy and efficient. 

Also - still no Fuji Colour Profiles in ON1 - but i hear some rumours they will add some in 2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys really need to stop saying sh*t like that. It's not useful or helpful to ANYONE. At all.   

I cant agree. I was so addicted to Adobe CRaw - tahat I didnt see other options. In fact I stopped looking for them long time ago - at the time I was xt1 user.

Now - very, very dissappointed with xt2 results I've seen at SOME of my pictures - I decided - No Adobe! Lets look at other options now.

 

Im saying - that just by stating something like: one tool is not satisfactory for me: was very usefull for myself.

Also - I heve not spoke about Lightroom raw developing tools if there are some(?). I always refere to CameraRaw - latest version. 

Edited by Torturro
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the information and links.

 

I've been asking myself these questions a lot recently but in all the research I have done I have to conclude that this topic is entirely subjective and there is no one definitive answer. Whilst one tool may produce sharper images, another may produce better colours. The best tool isn't the one that creates the sharpest images or best colour depth, it's the one that helps you produce the best, or most pleasing, images and makes you the most productive. Each tool can compensate for it's deficiencies through some (minor?) manual control.

 

For productivity:  Lightroom.  Sorry.  Hate to beat a dead horse as the saying goes, but LR is, iMHO one of the better tools for image management, and processing.  When I go on the road, I could come back with 3-5,000 images.   My southwest stop trip which took a long time I came back with almost 11,000 raw and jpeg images.  And LR, if you know how to cull effectively, is one of the better tools out there.  If ultimate speed is your thing, the photo mechanic would be the way to go.  Except, it's not a management/catalog/library program -- If I used it, I would still catalog, keyword, etc in LR anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been mostly happy with lightroom for those exact reasons, and development is very intuitive to me. My main complaint has been performance. But, I guess that's just a trade-off. It's good talking to others to help settle your questions. I'll personally be sticking with Lightroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, all for the feedback! I have to agree, LR does allow me to get a ton done quickly, but since I'm not shooting Canon/Nikon, the quality just isn't there, and it seems that it's getting worse if my sharpening issues are an indicator. 

I pulled down a trial of Capture One and it has promise. The image quality is noticeably better, but I'm not sure the workflow is as efficient as LR. It's probably too soon to say, I'm still learning it.

 

Appreciate the help!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just thought I'd pass along one other thing I've noticed. I opened LR5 up since it was still on my computer and has (had) the same catalog and viewed the same photos in LR5 and LR6 at the same time. LR6's sharpening (at least for Fuji RAW files) is much, much worse than LR5. So it looks as if Adobe made some change along the way that is horrific. 

 

Do I call Adobe? Or is that wasted effort?

Sigh...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the information and links.

 

I've been asking myself these questions a lot recently but in all the research I have done I have to conclude that this topic is entirely subjective and there is no one definitive answer. Whilst one tool may produce sharper images, another may produce better colours. The best tool isn't the one that creates the sharpest images or best colour depth, it's the one that helps you produce the best, or most pleasing, images and makes you the most productive. Each tool can compensate for it's deficiencies through some (minor?) manual control.

 

Subjective:  Yes.  But also objective as my images are stock images and are being sold worldwide.   I can't afford to be subjective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The petebridgwood articles on sharpening are out of date at this point. I'm convinced that updates to LR have rendered the recommendations to crank the detail slider to be poor advice. It might have been relevant and helpful a year or two ago, but it doesn't work that way now. I wasted two months following those guidelines after I bought my X-T2 because that was all that I could find as far as recommendations on sharpening in LR, his page shows up in many threads. Like I said, it might have been a great solution before, but LR updates have changed that.

 

I'm favoring the Iridient X-Transformer solution using recommendations found here http://www.lightofisaac.com/Lifeofisaac/2017/January/January-31-2017. I actually have adjusted those recommendations where I use "smoother" instead of "more detailed" in Iridient X-Transformer, and I use a lower amount of sharpening and detail once I'm in Lightroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My €0.02:

 

Any advice that amounts too "set your sharpening to xyz for all of your images" is just plain wrong

 

Sharpening is about what's in the shot, and even what lens you used, none of the Fuji glass is blunt, but (for example) the 18mm can take more sharpening than some of the other lenses, because it's a bit softer as standard

Link to post
Share on other sites

The petebridgwood articles on sharpening are out of date at this point. I'm convinced that updates to LR have rendered the recommendations to crank the detail slider to be poor advice. It might have been relevant and helpful a year or two ago, but it doesn't work that way now. I wasted two months following those guidelines after I bought my X-T2 because that was all that I could find as far as recommendations on sharpening in LR, his page shows up in many threads. Like I said, it might have been a great solution before, but LR updates have changed that.

 

I'm favoring the Iridient X-Transformer solution using recommendations found here http://www.lightofisaac.com/Lifeofisaac/2017/January/January-31-2017. I actually have adjusted those recommendations where I use "smoother" instead of "more detailed" in Iridient X-Transformer, and I use a lower amount of sharpening and detail once I'm in Lightroom.

 

I don't think they (PBs sharpening settings) are out of date at all.  What's out of date? How?  That's silly.  It's still the same cameras:  X-T1 and X-T2.  I'm a busy semi-pro, I don't have the time to diddle with Capture one or any thing else at this point in time.  My goal is to shoot, edit, distribute and sell images.  Period.  Not play with software.  I find C1 to be to difficult to use - but to give it it's fair shake I only gave it a week or so before I had to get back to work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they (PBs sharpening settings) are out of date at all.  What's out of date? How?  That's silly.  It's still the same cameras:  X-T1 and X-T2.  I'm a busy semi-pro, I don't have the time to diddle with Capture one or any thing else at this point in time.  My goal is to shoot, edit, distribute and sell images.  Period.  Not play with software.  I find C1 to be to difficult to use - but to give it it's fair shake I only gave it a week or so before I had to get back to work. 

Actually, not silly at all since LR is not static. That was the entire reason for this post, I've found that over time, the sharpening in LR has not only become awful, but causing otherwise good images to look worse because of the tool.

I do not consider myself a pixel peeper at all, but noticing the strange texture in my portraits has sent me down this path. 

I have noticed that if the portrait is very highly lit with a low ISO, LR's sharpening and PB's settings work well. At higher ISO's, things fall off quickly. If there is noise or grain, it squirts artifacts all over the image to the point of taking away from the image.

Moving from LR to Capture One is not a trivial task. I spent 1-2 hours a day learning the tool and verifying what it can/can't do over the last month. LR wins on a lot of fronts, but when it comes down to pure picture quality, Capture One wins by a very large margin. Enough so where I'm willing to go through the pain of switching and having a less efficient workflow. For me, the image quality takes precedence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

You guys really need to stop saying sh*t like that. It's not useful or helpful to ANYONE. At all.   LR works just fine.  It's a matter of what sharpening to use.  I've been a LR user since BETA 1.0.  And have been using it with my Fuji files since 2013.  Also, I've used LR going back to 2007 on my Fujifilm S1, and S2 Pro dSLR bodies shooting RAF files as well.

 

Please provide some constructive help.  Like:  Hey fella, go check out Pete Bridgewoods blog.  He has an outstanding post on sharpening raf files there that took my stock images from an abysmal acceptance rate of around 86% when I stopped using my Nikons, and switched to Fuji,  up to 98% of images submitted--All Fuji.  As a matter of fact, here are TWO links from his website on sharpening raw files:  Go here, for X-T2 and X-Pro2 files.    And go to this blog post for the X-T1 and X-Pro1 raw files.

 

Hope this helps. 

I've seen this suggestion on how to sharpen dozens of times, and most of it revolves around moving the Detail slider to 100, and for my photos, this never does any good at all. The waxing and worms show up just as dramatically in almost every photo I've tried it on, from four different XTrans cameras, starting with my X100s, all the way up through my X-T2. I've stopped trying this method. 

 

The only thing I've found that works when trying to get better fine detail is using a different program to create your base image (I use Photo Ninja) and then exporting a TIFF and working from there. Unfortunately, this loses you the ability to use the camera profiles that make Fuji so great, so there are unacceptable trade-offs for every workaround (in my opinion). I only use it when I'm doing B&W images, since the color isn't an issue in that case.

 

Mostly I just accept the fact that I won't get good detail in my color photos, but I've found that the level of worminess that shows up depends a LOT on the lens I shot the photo on. For instance, my 24mm f/1.4 has a LOT of worms show up really quickly with sharpening, but I get it much less dramatically with my kit lens. I've got a personal theory (based on very little) that the issue actually comes from the automatic lens correction stuff going on, rather than the sharpening or demosaicing. Though I'd also be completely unsurprised to hear that I'm wrong. 

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.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Looking more like the next Fuji camera we see will be an X-T50 but it is still a rumor and no specs have been published.
    • Hey guys, The shutter on/off button switch may be loose on mine. After turning camera on and pressing the shutter/holding close to the area, the camera will turn off and say 'sensor cleaning'. This doesn't happen if I'm shooting via touch screen at all. Everything else is functional. Anyone else experience this before? Would love a much cheaper fix since Fuji Canada just quoted me $700 CAD to fix it, and considering everything else is functional except that part I'm not even sure why MPMB Main Board parts is being replaced😕 I got no explanation from them either.
    • As far as I know the firmware is not country specific. Are you sure that the filename has not been changed ( I am told this can happen with mac os). That's the only thing I can think of.
    • My x-t5 does not exhibit the focusing switch behaviour as you report it, so that is very strange and indicative of a fault. It does not matter whether the flash is attached or not. Once you set the camera for your studio flash, say 1/250th at f5.6, the camera, which is showing you what you will get at that exposure without the flash, will show a black screen unless the ambient light is brighter than what you would typically get indoors. That is why, as Jerry says, you have to set preview exp/wb to off. I have set a button for this.
    • I connected to FRAME.IO a while back and it works fine, but the camera wouldn't connect to the internet all of a sudden today and would get stuck on the reset screen, including initializing and even switching USB Connection mode. Is anyone else experiencing the same thing?
×
×
  • Create New...