Do you use in-camera sharpening?

[mcampos]

Do you use any in-camera sharpening with the D2X?

I got mine about a week ago and did not get a chance to really work with it until this weekend. Most of the images I took of my son seem in focus, but also they look soft. I normally don't use any in camera sharpening as I rather add it with Capture or Photoshop. I am trying to decide if the camera has a problem focusing or just that I should plug in some sharpening.

Your response will be greatly appreciated.

 

[Ruffles]

I keeps mine set on Med-high to High. This is so jpgs will look nice. I shoot 99% raw so I turn off the sharpening in NC and do it in PS.

 

[Steve S]

FOr jpgs I like high,

I keeps mine set on Med-high to High. This is so jpgs will look nice. I shoot 99% raw so I turn off the sharpening in NC and do it in PS.

for raw, I like normal or med high, then turn that back off in NC4, and apply the Ron R recommended amts to offset the effects of the AA filter. In PS, I'll always apply more, depending on final output.

 

[ednaz]

Medium low

I'm a medium low guy. I shot in really high-contrast backlight with compressed raw, and felt like too much sharpening in camera made compressed raw less acceptable.

 

[David Fink]

I keep in-camera sharpening turned off, preferring to do all sharpening in postprocessing.

In Photoshop, I first apply "capture sharpening" using PhotoKit Sharpener. Then, as the final postprocessing step, I apply output sharpening, either manually (USM), or with PhotoKit Sharpener, or with NIK Sharpener Pro.

Best wishes,

David

 

[Steve S]

But Ed, with raw,

aren't all the camera settings applied OVER the raw image, ie, appliqueed, or overlaid, if you will, and therefore can be completely undone in NC? That's the way I always understood it.

 

[David Fink]

Re: But Ed, with raw,

aren't all the camera settings applied OVER the raw image, ie, appliqueed, or overlaid, if you will, and therefore can be completely undone in NC? That's the way I always understood it.

Steve,

I think you are correct about this, which raises the question, why have the camera do any sharpening if you're only going to remove the effects in NC. I know some prefer it this way because the in-camera sharpening allows a "sharpened" preview in NC, but I'd rather just convert the NEF to a 16-bit TIFF, then do all previewing/sharpening in Photoshop. Likewise, I don't need to see JPEGs sharpened before I work with them in post.

Best wishes,

David

 

[ednaz]

the reason for incamera sharpening...

It was brought home to me last night very strongly. I went to a group shoot yesterday, and when I came home I had 450 RAW images to deal with. And that's not counting the 150 film images that I get back today.

I believe that in camera sharpening may be done using a different algorithm - at least in the D100, sharpening in camera was distinctly inferior to doing it in capture, at least to these eyes. And the best sharpening seemed to be from Nikon View's dinky little processor. Even if the theory is the same, how the process is implemented makes a difference.

I also think, although can't know for sure given that I'm not a member of a geek squad, that in camera sharpening with compressed raw changes the image for the worse in certain situations. I shoot a lot of things with really agonizingly long stretched tonal ranges. particularly in the areas where a color fades finally to white, it looked to me like compressed raw with medium sharpening went all chunky on me, where compressed raw with no sharpening didn't. But that may just be what it looked like in a 10 minute, 10 images comparison I did.

 

[Bill]

I keep my camera sharpening turned off or at normal. I then do post processing in PS for color, contrast and sharpening. I prefer to shoot most of my images in Tiff format to include as much information as possible.

Enjoy, Bill

 

[mcampos]

Thanks for all your replies.

One thing I always though is why input any settings in the camera if I shoot RAW, but lately I have been reading articles that claim that even with RAW, some processing goes on and that the settings you put in are going to affect the final image. I tend not to believe this, but who knows, everyone has a different opinion about RAW.

 

[ednaz]

Mike, you said exactly why I tested...

While I'm not sure I believe that some processing goes on in raw in the camera all the time, I'm certain that some goes on with compression of raw, and it seems to me that sharpening does get processed in a compressed raw image.

 

[Steve S]

Well, Ron R, Moose, & Yves all use in-cam sharpening

While I'm not sure I believe that some processing goes on in raw in the camera all the time, I'm certain that some goes on with compression of raw, and it seems to me that sharpening does get processed in a compressed raw image.

set to Normal when shooting raw. Not sure about Thom. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me. I don't even pretend to know even a fraction of what they know about photography.

 

[Catz]

I have my camera set to High sharpening because I like tack sharp images. The reason behind this for me is because it is easier to soften an image then it is to sharpen a picture if the soften image is too soft.

I may be wrong and many may disagree with my theory but it works for me.

 

[mcampos]

I am getting a lot of soft images from the D2X with the sharpening set to none, even when I manual focus. I am still trying to figure out if it is me or the camera. With the D2H I get much better results, heck even with the D100 I get much better shots.

I don't want to jump the gun just yet, but the camera may end up in Torrance.

 

[ianm]

Post a sample

Mike why not post a sample here and we can comment ?

Personally I shoot RAW with sharpening set to normal - if nothing else it allows me to check focus in the preview. I remove sharpening in NC and then apply USM.

 

[mcampos]

Great idea Ian.

Here are two versions of the same shot taken with the 85mm f1.8 of a wall about 50-70 feet away. The first image shows the image as it came from the camera without sharpening. The second image done with the sharpening turned up to high in Capture, it is probably overdone, but it highlights the difference. My next step is going to be to take test shots with the D2H vs. the D2X with exactly the same settings.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

View attachment 8959

 

[ianm]

Difficult to tell with this subject - and it's possibly overexposed ? The first shot does look soft though. I find that RAW images from the D2X without sharpening look sharp to begin with.

Try setting the lens and camera to manual focus and see if this gives better results.

 

[Catz]

Difficult to tell with this subject - and it's possibly overexposed ? The first shot does look soft though. I find that RAW images from the D2X without sharpening look sharp to begin with.

Try setting the lens and camera to manual focus and see if this gives better results.

Hi Ian,

If this is the case that RAW images should be sharp even without sharpening, then I must have a problem with my D2X. I need to try a test tomorrow because it is raining right now.

 

[mcampos]

Thanks Ian,

By looking at the histogram for that section of the image it looks as if the exposure is pretty good, if anything there is a slight underexposure. Pretty much since I got the D2X I have gotten soft images consistently, I have to setup some testing and take it from there. I don't want to jump to conclusions and take the camera in until I am sure it is not me who is making a mistake.

 

[ianm]

Hi Ian,

If this is the case that RAW images should be sharp even without sharpening, then I must have a problem with my D2X. I need to try a test tomorrow because it is raining right now.

Catz,
Don't get me wrong, the RAW image will definately benefit from sharpening. I just find the quality of the D2X RAW file to be excellent straight from the camera.