Am I ruining images?

I agree. It is such a fine line and easy to cross when we want those crisps images. Key is to get it right from the start. Looking more closely I think #2 and 3 are front focused. What was your aperture set at, how far where you away and do you know the focus points you camera locked on. Possible focus/recompose being a culprit?

Here is some good info on sharpening.

http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …ials/image-sharpening.htm

Geonerd wrote in post #15961000
What? Am I the only one here wondering, "What the heck?"

At 1:1 or greater, these images look terribly noisy and dithered. It almost looks like you ran some artsy-fartsy frosted-glass filter...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Check to see that the in-camera sharpening is off. Even then, try resetting all the camera's parameters to default. I also wonder if one of your programs has suffered a 'bumped' check box that is intentionally dithering or otherwise doing something it shouldn't. Try a no-frills RAW->JPG conversion and see if the problem persists. What sort of PP are you doing?

I am sad to admit my techno skills aren't up to your level-not sure what a lot of what you are saying means. What is dithering?? A bumped check box? As for my pp process, shoot in raw, do some work in ACR, PS Elements 9 including sharpening and noise reduction, move to edit where I will use High pass filter some as mentioned in op and save in PSD. Understand that is a lossless format. To post, convert to large file jpeg.

skatchkins wrote in post #15961063
I see jpeg artifacts as well. Compression/save issues?

As noted above, techno skills are limited-what are jpeg artifacts?

Snydremark wrote in post #15961168
You're blowing up an already compressed file, not looking at the original file at 1:1. So, you're seeing compression artifacts and such that aren't (shouldn't) be there in the original file.

Rog: Can you upload a full sized original of one of these files to something like Dropbox?

Eric, I set up a dropbox acc't, somewhat at the displeasure of my security/firewall software. Hope it's ok. Now, I'm embarrassed to ask-what constitutes a full-size image? Straight out of camera, a specific pixel count, resolution, or physical dimension? Sorry, I don't know.

digital paradise wrote in post #15961342
To help you with that use the masking slider in the detail pallet which provides edge sharpening. I usually go about 80. If you hold down the option key (MAC) while using the slider you can see the results.

Also for final sharpening I use this method which is also an edge sharpening process. Highpass is pretty good as well.

http://www.earthboundl​ight.com …search=edge+mas​k&bool=and

my 7D

Crop

Usually use the masking slider in PS Elements ACR, but thought it was for noise in the bg primarily. Usually use 50-60. Do not use MAC. And think the link was for working in one of those CS high end software programs. My pocketbook doesn't allow that. Also, as mentioned in op, use high pass-prefer over unsharpmask.

René Damkot wrote in post #15963972
Yeah, looks like sharpening (and NR) settings in LR could be better chosen.

As stated, do not own LR.

ardeekay wrote in post #15964437
As stated, do not own LR.

LR/ ACR: No difference WRT sharpening (assuming comparable versions)…

Here's a tutorial about LR. ACR works the same.

René Damkot wrote in post #15966059
LR/ ACR: No difference WRT sharpening (assuming comparable versions)…

Here's a tutorial about LR. ACR works the same.

You might get some disagreement there. Have never used LR but after viewing a couple of tutorials on LR sharpening and NR, might make that my next purchase(if I can get my college student grandson buy it for me-shh). Looked good as several members touted it.

Rog: As far as "full sized", I just mean the file straight out of the camera, before any edits have been done

Geonerd wrote in post #15961000
What? Am I the only one here wondering, "What the heck?"

A few questions.

1. Do you believe that this is relevant to the final picture, at the final size it's displayed at?

2. Do you think that this micro detail stops anyone from enjoying the content of the picture?

I think the only time I'd ever notice what you've pointed out was if I tripped over face first and put my head through one of his printed pictures.

romanv wrote in post #15967487
A few questions.

1. Do you believe that this is relevant to the final picture, at the final size it's displayed at?

2. Do you think that this micro detail stops anyone from enjoying the content of the picture?

I think the only time I'd ever notice what you've pointed out was if I tripped over face first and put my head through one of his printed pictures.

May I gently suggest you go back and read the very first post in this thread. The OP asks specifically about the noise, and I offered the opinion that something was definitely wrong with his processing. (What, I have no idea, since I don't use his software.) And for that you essentially accuse me of being some dweeby pixel peeper?

Jpeg artifacts are generally blocky, blobby loss of detail and color fidelity. Try saving an image as a jpeg with an extremely low quality and you'll instantly see the issue. IMO, it looks nothing like your noise.

Dithering is the stippled, bumpy texture that your pictures seem to suffer from. This can happen if you're somehow processing in 8 (256 colors) or 15/16 bit (32/64K) instead of 24 or 48 bit. If you only have 256 colors in total, the software tried to dither the output to more smoothly blend the colors together. The effect is somewhat similar to your pics, but I don' thing that's it either.

I think it's got something to do with a sharpening tool somewhere along the way. What is this highpass filter you are using? That sounds the most likely. Try zooming in when you are applying it and see if it makes this noise pop up.

That definitely has the looks of oversharpening, perhaps combined with over-aggressive de-noising (though oversharpening itself could do that).

As OP, think maybe it's time to kill this thread. Obviously, we all have our priorities, areas of special skills and concerns, things we see and wish to change. Like they say, the main objective here is to please yourself w/ your images. And since I posed the original question, I had some doubts about these shots and wasn't totally pleased. Guess the final decision was they weren't bad but there were certainly things could be changed/improved. And since a lot of the comments/suggestions were beyond my techno skills and understanding, it's going to be a long process. Of course, I can do a better job taking the shots and do away w/ a lot of this noise reduction and sharpening business, right?

Thank you everyone for taking the time to comment and offer your suggestions. Appreciate it.

No, your shots will need sharpening at some point. Best to learn how to do it to your satisfaction, not simply wish your images were sharper.

Kirk