Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 20 Jan 2015 (Tuesday) 20:09
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Newer camera need more sharpening in post?

 
mfunnell
Senior Member
Avatar
375 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 22, 2015 21:42 |  #16

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395489 (external link)
Like i said > If you have excellent skills + excellent lenses, you do not need sharpening AT ALL !

This may be true for cameras without an anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor. But we are talking about Canon DSLRs, aren't we?

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395489 (external link)
Sharpening a picture (camera-in or post processed) is just a way to hide our weakness/lack of knowledge/wake up on the left foot/drink to much coffee in the morning/whatever ;)

Or to compensate for an AA filter or to put accutance back together after re-sizing/re-sampling an image and a raft of other things as well (for example, selective use of low-value, high radius USM to provide local contrast ehnancement, among many other techniques which moved from the wet darkroom to the digital one). Somehow I thing you're being overly prescriptive here, and perhaps ignoring techniques used more for printing than for on-screen displays.

...Mike


Some digital cameras, some film cameras, some lenses & other kit.
Day-to-day photos on flickr (external link), some older stuff at dA (external link).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
Post edited over 4 years ago by Reservoir Dog.
     
Jan 22, 2015 22:45 |  #17

mfunnell wrote in post #17395583 (external link)
This may be true for cameras without an anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor. But we are talking about Canon DSLRs, aren't we?

Or to compensate for an AA filter or to put accutance back together after re-sizing/re-sampling an image and a raft of other things as well (for example, selective use of low-value, high radius USM to provide local contrast ehnancement, among many other techniques which moved from the wet darkroom to the digital one). Somehow I thing you're being overly prescriptive here, and perhaps ignoring techniques used more for printing than for on-screen displays.

...Mike

Please, take the text i wrote as a whole, if your start to disassemble it sentence by sentence, it's getting way out of it's context, and yes i speak for Canon DSLRs ... too, unless 1DX or 1000D changed brand ... (i named them as example but you didn't read what i wrote before, you took only what you're interest in).

Now if you never open your pictures, and when you look at it, you told to yourself about contrast and sharpness ... "it's just perfect, i do not need to do something", but instead put everything on AA filters and micro-contrast problems/issues, i'm sorry for you :oops:

And to get back on what i wrote-track, it's not the use of the sharpening or the micro-contrast i was speaking, we do/did it all of us > but it's when people say "no sharpening added"...
Below the original quote i quoted ;)

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17394412 (external link)
So why do so many people post pics with "NO sharpening in post" as if it's cheating?


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rgs
Goldmember
Avatar
2,294 posts
Gallery: 144 photos
Likes: 846
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
     
Jan 22, 2015 22:56 |  #18

One of the things I've noticed about my new 7D MKII is that the RAW files can be sharpened much more than my those from my 50D. I am amazed at how much I can drag out of them in post. I don't know all of the reasons or the science involved but I do know they respond to post very nicely.


Canon 7d MkII, Canon 50D, Pentax 67, Canon 30D, Baker Custom 4x5, Canon EF 24-104mm f4, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 Macro, Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC

The Singular Image (external link)Richard Smith Photography (external link)
Richard Smith Real Estate Photography (external link)500PX (external link)
Fine Art America (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mfunnell
Senior Member
Avatar
375 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Post edited over 4 years ago by mfunnell. (4 edits in all)
     
Jan 23, 2015 01:53 |  #19

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395650 (external link)
Please, take the text i wrote as a whole, if your start to disassemble it sentence by sentence, it's getting way out of it's context

Prescriptive and prickly. You really do have that alliteration thing going for you.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395650 (external link)
and yes i speak for Canon DSLRs ... too, unless 1DX or 1000D changed brand ... (i named them as example but you didn't read what i wrote before, you took only what you're interest in).

It is possible to read your whole post without quoting the whole thing in my reply.

Really.

As to those two particular camera models, they do in fact have anti-aliasing filters. Anti-aliasing filters introduce delibrate blur, to avoid moire effects. The use of sharpening (a typical suggestion is USM at 300, radius 0.3 pixels then back off from there to your personal visual taste) is often recommended as a way of re-introducing sharpness deliberately degraded by use of a hardware low-pass (or bandpass) filter (which is what an AA filter is). Some cameras do not use AA filters. My Leica M does not (and so is more susceptible to moire than a camera with an AA sensor would be, but provides greater per-pixel sharpness due to it's absence). My Fujifilm X Pro-1 does not have an AA filter, but avoids moire through use of a non-Bayer RGB array (using, instead, an X-Trans array - which potentially introduces different problems due to less-well-understood de-mosaicing algorithms). A Nikon D810 (which I don't own) doesn't have an AA filter, nor do most medium-format digital systems, as manufacturers assume that those who use such systems are aware of the trade-offs and the various solutions available for resolving problems of one sort or another.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395650 (external link)
Now if you never open your pictures, and when you look at it, you told to yourself about contrast and sharpness ... "it's just perfect, i do not need to do something", but instead put everything on AA filters and micro-contrast problems/issues, i'm sorry for you :oops:

That is just drivel. But if it suits you to believe it, then more power to you. Normally I would have avoided either quoting or commenting, but I'd hate to be accused, again, of not having read your drivel simply because I failed to quote it.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17395650 (external link)
And to get back on what i wrote-track, it's not the use of the sharpening or the micro-contrast i was speaking, we do/did it all of us > but it's when people say "no sharpening added"...
Below the original quote i quoted ;)

To which I can only respond with bemused confusion, as I've no real idea what you're on about, but for the sake of completeness I've not excluded it from my quoting.

...Mike


Some digital cameras, some film cameras, some lenses & other kit.
Day-to-day photos on flickr (external link), some older stuff at dA (external link).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,959 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Jan 23, 2015 06:36 |  #20

At least for older EOS cameras, Canon deliberately made the default sharpening as well as the settable range different in different camera models. Simpler cameras had a more aggressive sharpening than the 1D-series, for example. This was based on the thought that user's buying low-end models were not that skilled at knowing what kind of sharpening to apply, so the camera did it for them. But those who bought a 1D-series camera were more skilled, thus didn't want the camera to do it all for them. They would prefer applying sharpening themselves, during post processing, so it could be adjusted to suit print size etc.


Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nethawked
Senior Member
797 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 242
Joined Oct 2014
Location: Virginia, USA
     
Jan 23, 2015 08:54 |  #21

For reasons alluded to early in this thread, all RAW images can benefit from sharpening in PP. Its not a bad thing, if done correctly, and if you aren't tweaking sharpness levels while reducing noise (where necessary) you're doing it wrong.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon_Doh
Senior Member
Avatar
869 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 64
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Pyongyang, North Korea
     
Jan 23, 2015 09:56 |  #22

Make sure your lens is fine tuned to your camera. I was having to do a lot of sharpening until I discovered the main lens I used needed fine tuning. Once I made the adjustment I do very little sharpening in post now.


I use a Kodak Brownie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Jan 24, 2015 19:43 |  #23

mfunnell wrote in post #17395794 (external link)
Prescriptive and prickly. You really do have that alliteration thing going for you.

It is possible to read your whole post without quoting the whole thing in my reply.

Really.

As to those two particular camera models, they do in fact have anti-aliasing filters. Anti-aliasing filters introduce delibrate blur, to avoid moire effects. The use of sharpening (a typical suggestion is USM at 300, radius 0.3 pixels then back off from there to your personal visual taste) is often recommended as a way of re-introducing sharpness deliberately degraded by use of a hardware low-pass (or bandpass) filter (which is what an AA filter is). Some cameras do not use AA filters. My Leica M does not (and so is more susceptible to moire than a camera with an AA sensor would be, but provides greater per-pixel sharpness due to it's absence). My Fujifilm X Pro-1 does not have an AA filter, but avoids moire through use of a non-Bayer RGB array (using, instead, an X-Trans array - which potentially introduces different problems due to less-well-understood de-mosaicing algorithms). A Nikon D810 (which I don't own) doesn't have an AA filter, nor do most medium-format digital systems, as manufacturers assume that those who use such systems are aware of the trade-offs and the various solutions available for resolving problems of one sort or another.

That is just drivel. But if it suits you to believe it, then more power to you. Normally I would have avoided either quoting or commenting, but I'd hate to be accused, again, of not having read your drivel simply because I failed to quote it.

To which I can only respond with bemused confusion, as I've no real idea what you're on about, but for the sake of completeness I've not excluded it from my quoting.

...Mike

You continue on the same way, :-(
This discussion will lead nowhere, we are clearly from 2 different planets ... i'm done.


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeivan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,205 posts
Gallery: 255 photos
Likes: 2724
Joined Aug 2005
Location: houston
     
Jan 24, 2015 20:24 |  #24

Nope, he is on the right track. What we need is a 7dii without an anti-alias filter, imho, of course.


MIKEIVAN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,868 views & 1 like for this thread
Newer camera need more sharpening in post?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Gianpaolo
850 guests, 348 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.