comparison of sharpening actions

[gandini]

I suppose this is "software!" I have put together a webpage that compares the effect of different actions on the same image. Most of the actions are those currently available, although I do include some "older" ones that we all started with, just to see how far we've got.
click here (http://gandini.unm.edu/personal/Photography/Main%20pages/SharpComp.htm)

cheers (and here's hoping my tiny server doesn't overload...)

[Conk]

Link not working for me.

[slejhamer]

Most interesting, Philip. With some of them the differences are subtle, in others haloing and noise are a problem. Not easy to say which is "best" though, because one's preference for more or less sharpness is subjective. Do you have a strong preference?

You might also want to consider the two lonestar digital techniques posted here; they are fairly popular and I find they work well together:
http://www.lonestardigital.com/photoshop_quicktips.htm

Also, another technique mentioned a while ago on this site is to not use USM at all, but instead to run a high-pass filter on a separate layer, set the layer to soft or hard light, and then adjust opacity as desired. You can add a layer mask and be very selective as to which areas get sharpened and which don't, instead of using the more global techniques. It's great for portraits, wherein you may only want to sharpen certain elements like eyes.

Thanks for this comparison!

[gandini]

Conk wrote:
Link not working for me.

The link works for me, but that's never a good test, since it's my server! You can also get to the page via my website as follows:
1. click the link in my sig below
2. click the link to Photography Home page
3. click the link to monitor calibration in Technical Notes
4. click the link to sharpening action comparison there.

Sorry that this is lengthy, but it does get you there.

I did check the url, and it reads correctly. Could be that the university server was down, that routes you to my server.

cheers,

[gandini]

slejhamer wrote:
...deletions
You might also want to consider the two lonestar digital techniques posted here; they are fairly popular and I find they work well together:
http://www.lonestardigital.com/photoshop_quicktips.htm
Also, another technique mentioned a while ago on this site is to not use USM at all, but instead to run a high-pass filter on a separate layer, set the layer to soft or hard light, and then adjust opacity as desired.
...deletions
Thanks for this comparison!

As always, it is my pleasure to add something to the discussion, especially when I benefit so much from the outcome!
I have seen the lonestar website before--but it was in the early days. As was the reference to the high pass filter instead of USM.
I will give them a try, and post them along with the actions already in the comparison.
As you know, sharpening is very image dependent. I chose an image that had some large petal areas, and some fine details, and some contrasty edges. The section is from the center of the original G1 image, at full size, with only sharpening done, nothing else re: curves or levels.
Given how relatively easy it is to produce the lay-over page I am using, I will do more of this. My next project is to compare different ways of getting a black and white image.
Sorry to anyone who is having trouble viewing the page. It's no Amazon.com server...

cheers,

[drisley]

Gandini,

I'm glad to see you put my Sharp-n-Smart Action to good use!
Great Work!

I love your website btw.

[gandini]

drisley wrote:
Gandini,
I'm glad to see you put my Sharp-n-Smart Action to good use!
Great Work!
I love your website btw.

I still have much more work to do with sharpening actions, and must keep in mind how image-specific this is, but I'll say that your Sharp-n-Smart works very well and compares very favorably with Fred Miranda's latest.

I do have one comment though, which applies to your action as well as Fred's, and that concerns the action's action. Both actions clear the history too often, and too severely. It would be nice to stop, as was the case with the old UltraSharpen Pro and EdgeSharpen Pro, just to see what the intermediate steps were doing. Both these "old" actions allowed for much more user input during the action's progress, and left all steps in the history. I know it's a compromise between speed and automation of action, and user input and control, so I'm not actually complaining. I'm just making an observation. I still prefer the overall effect of your action, and Fred's to those old ones!

cheers,

[drisley]

Thanks Gandini,

Such comparison to Fred's action is high praise indeed.
I have been thinking of adding some intermediate steps to the action to let you control the amount of sharpening. That will probably be in the next update.
I will also look into some way to leave the history intact.

Once again, keep up the great work (btw, I found the G1/G3 IR comparison very interesting. too bad the G3 doesnt work with IR quite as well. It would be interesting to see a G2/G3 IR comparison as well).