Raw vs. JPEG Sharpening: USM vs. FVU Raw Converter vs. CS Pr

[scottbergerphoto]

I just worked on some photos shot Raw at a NY Liberty Basketball game. Here are some observations. The Raw pictures are noticeably softer then JPEG's taken at the same settings (ISO 800, in camera parameters standard, Lens: Canon 70-200/2.8). Sharpening after the fact via all three processes mentioned above: File Viewer Utility(low and standard), Fred Mirand's CS Pro(low), and USM in Photoshop Elements(100-150%, Radius: .6, Threhhold: 0) add noise or pixelation(colored dots) to the image. The FVU(standard) and the CS Pro(low) look identical. The pictures I took the week before in Fine JPEG are much better and require no sharpening, and have less noise at Iso 800. The Raw pictures are inferior to the JPEG's. I am printing on an Epson Stylus Photo 2200.
I would appreciate any comments or suggestions. I would like to get the most out of the Raw files.

[scottbergerphoto]

As a follow up to the post I shot some additional Raw pictures at ISO 100 today. They were sharp and needed very little work. From my limited experience with the Raw format, it seems that they are more susceptable to grain and apparant softness at high ISO's then JPEG, but show great color saturation and clarity at lower ISO's.

[Pekka]

Just try C1 Lite.

[scottbergerphoto]

Referring me to a software application doesn't really address the issue I raised about Raw format being much more sensitive to noise at high iso's then JPEG. It also seems that post processing does not undo what shooting RAW does. The noise remains after USM, CS Pro10D, and FVU. Shooting JPEG at ISO 800 shows no noise.

Here's a follow up:
I redid the RAW Conversions that looked so bad after conversion with FVU, using BreezeBrowser. The noise was gone! My shots look beautiful. No noise at Iso 800.
So here are three unanswered questions:
1) Why does FVU do such a bad job with high Iso's?
2) Why does BreezeBrowser do such a good job with RAW shots shot at high Iso's?
3) What is Canon doing wrong?

[hotmetal]

Hi All

I've been trying similar things, I downloaded the trial version of Capture 1 LE and installed that.

I also have ACR with Elements 2.

So shot two images, just my garden!

1st one RAW, 2nd large JPEG standard setting 100ISO.

Opened the RAW file in Capture 1, ACR and FVU all with no sharpening. Images then USM sharpened in elements 150%@0.7R 0T

Opened JPEG image, just relied on the in camera sharpening.

Printed all, just sections of full frame.

JPEG is better all round, with better handling of blown highlights and much cleaner.


Alan

[scottbergerphoto]

I redid my Iso 800 shots with BreezeBrowser and they were beautiful. No noise. No sharpening needed. I don't know whats wrong with FVU.

[Kevin Connery]

If you use a Unsharp Mask Threshold to 0 (zero), you are telling the sharpening algorithm to emphasise ALL edges. Including noise.

Try running the same test with a threshold set to 5 or 10. That'll still sharpen most of the 'real' details, and reduce the impact of noise.

All three settings on USM are there for a reason, and while a Threshold of 0 is OK (if not necessarily optimum) for a very low noise image--low ISO capture, high resolution scan of low-ISO film--it WILL emphasise noise.

The noisier the underlying image, the higher the Threshold should be if you want to avoid making the noise more visible.

Now, that doesn't mean the FVU's conversion isn't flawed--it may well be. But this test demonstrates more the effects of USM than FVU.

[scottbergerphoto]

Thanks for the advice and the explanation!
Scott