Sharpening -- in camera or in editing?

[jimsolt]

Opinions please. Which is better -- using the sharpening modes in the G6 or doing it with editing like Photoshop Unsharp Mask?
Jim

[Andy_T]

Use RAW in the camera, convert to TIFF, apply USM later.

Best regards,
Andy

[bauerman]

I would prefer to do it outside the camera in the post processing - as I have more control over the amount applied and I can "preview" the results better than with in-camera sharpening. I would rather start with a less sharp shot out of the cam - and then work my magic with it software-wise. That's just me........

[dbump]

If you're shooting in JPEG mode, be wary of disabling sharpening completely (not sure you can do that in later G-models, I think my G2 only has low/med/high). To roughly quote from Vince Brockaert's 123 Digital Imaging, the camera applies sharpening before jpeg compression. Applying sharpening only after compression could make the jpeg squares more visible.
Obviously not a consideration with RAW...

[pcasciola]

If you're shooting in JPEG mode, be wary of disabling sharpening completely (not sure you can do that in later G-models, I think my G2 only has low/med/high). To roughly quote from Vince Brockaert's 123 Digital Imaging, the camera applies sharpening before jpeg compression. Applying sharpening only after compression could make the jpeg squares more visible.
Obviously not a consideration with RAW...
Hmmmm..... That's an interesting point. I've always been a fan of the least amount of in camera processing possible because I figure they have to be taking all kinds of shortcuts if Photoshop takes 100 times as long on a 3GHz PC to do the same operation that Canon's tiny CPU is doing, but this one could have some merit. I mostly shoot RAW but I often shoot JPEG outdoors now, so I may need to rethink that.

[flowe]

For any editing such as rotation, perspective and probably most other, the (SL) jpeg file preferrably is as soft as possible. This results in the least gradients between image features, and on remapping the least effort and best result in interpolation. Any amount of in-cam sharpening requires so to say undoing this first and later redoing it again - with the obvious losses. The same applies to noise, accentuated by any in-cam sharpening. Better denoise the softer file first and sharpen it afterwards.

Therefore with the G6 (and G3 before) I keep Func/Custom Effect/Sharpness always in "minus" position. This is probably is very close to "no in-cam sharpening" for jpeg files, and may even benefit the jpeg process itself and the resulting overall quality.

Normal and plus sharpness settings to me only seem appropriate for outside printing of unedited pictures - because this is the standard they rely on.

[jimsolt]

Therefore with the G6 (and G3 before) I keep Func/Custom Effect/Sharpness always in "minus" position. This is probably is very close to "no in-cam sharpening" for jpeg files, and may even benefit the jpeg process itself and the resulting overall quality.

Normal and plus sharpness settings to me only seem appropriate for outside printing of unedited pictures - because this is the standard they rely on.

Till now, I had assumed the Function/No Effect setting eliminated sharpening. Does it? I can't find instructions for setting Custom effects anywhere, so I have "till now" ignored this setting.
I gather from replies so far, the sharpening process is best put off till post.
JIm

[Andy_T]

Some basic consideration ...

Sharpening can be easily added to any picture (and normally greatly improves it, if done right), but it can hardly be removed again. Once you've done it, you have so-called sharpening artefacts.

For this reason, sharpening normally is the last step in any workflow ... take the picture, download it, transform it to work with it in PS, do any modifications you might want to do, like change colours etc... then SAVE ... then resize for the web, then apply sharpening and then save as JPEG.

If you want to have the least in-camera sharpening, then RAW is the way to go.

Best regards,
Andy

[jimsolt]

Andy, I agree with you about RAW being the way to go, and when I ask myself why I think this way, I conclude it is to start with the purest image possible. That said (or thought out) in camera sharpening seems out of the question. I was surprised to find that in RAW mode of the G6 I have the option of introducing low sharpening. I guess there might be some use for this, but I can't think of one.
Thanks for your help.
Jim

[flowe]

Jim wrote:
I can't find instructions for setting Custom effects anywhere, so I have "till now" ignored this setting. Till now, I had assumed the Function/No Effect setting eliminated sharpening. Does it?
As customary, the G6 manual is not clear. Page 100 explains how to open Custom Effects with Contrast, Sharpness and Saturation, each with the options MINUS (termed "weak" in the manual) - 0 ("normal") - PLUS ("strong").

As commonly agreed, CCD output always needs sharpening. So it is a safe bet that "normal" stands for the standard sharpening the camera applies to JPEG files unless told otherwise. If so, MINUS and PLUS mean less or more than this standard. If so, Effects Off retains standard sharpening (as well as contrast and saturation), overriding any deviating setting in Custom Effects.

Then there is the Effect option "Low Sharpening", recommended for portraits etc. This doesn't allow to independently modify contrast and saturation. But it still says "Sharpening", in this case "Low Sharpening", and I take this as "Less than normal". But I never use it.

I've done some research earlier with the G3, showing that MINUS produces a softer image than Low Sharpening. Whether MINUS means no sharpening at all is unknown, but it could well be. MINUS produces the softest JPEG file the camera is able to. And, after editing and appropriate final sharpening, this leads to an image that is clearly sharper and cleaner than Custom Sharpness PLUS - this being entirely unsuitable for any editing, for reasons mentioned above.

Results of the research mentioned you can find here (http://homepage.hispeed.ch/flowe/digifoto/incamshe.htm) (2.6MB download and long read!)

Of course I agree that RAW is technically the best way, if you accept the circumstances. I decided to remain with JPEG as recording format and to try to find best procedures for results pleasing me very well.