On the subject of sharpening, I’ve done countless experiments doing so in stages and I’ve never seen anything conclusive that tells me spending extra time creating several stages of sharpening makes the image look better than just using one pass of USM. In fact, I’d argue that you lose more quality applying 10 stages of sharpening, and thus messing with your image 10 times, than you would just applying one pass of USM at the amount the image needs. It’s always the case that the less you can do to an image, especially JPEG, the higher the quality will be.

Old Shape… I’d be very interested if you could possibly post a side by side comparison of two images sharpened differently so we can see the ‘huge’ difference?

Paul

Paul, it probably doesn’t make a hoot of difference when viewing on a telly, but I print (Epson R1800) at A3 on “Ilford Gallery Smooth Pearl” for competitions, and it shows up on such. One hit at 90% will produce a sparkle that looks unreal in certain areas.
Again, subject matter has an affect on how much sharpening you can get away with.
You’ll have to try it yersen, and waste a few sheets of A3 like I did 😡 at over a quid a sheet plus ink!
We await an answer on the original posting, if it was submitted at the qual. we see, then it is almost bound to be rejected. Posting to the web needs a low quality for (a) Speed of loading (b) copyright protection….but posting to a site such as Airliners/shutterstock etc. needs to be a very high quality.
The tool used to reduce the qual. is also a key factor. I use “Save for web” in CS2 and move the quality slider to suit. I have also used “Image resiser” from Mr Gates, it’s a Microsoft Powertoy from their official website. It’s a very good tool, one is able to resise many pics at one click, and it renders the shots quite well. I once did a slide show (digital projection) of images resised this way and they looked damn good.
You can also sharpen a picture by playing with contrast, if for example there were stark differences in the picture, say a Piano keyboard, then the contrast is easy to find, and easy to sharpen. To do it properly you have to play with contrast in the Red Green Blue channels…..may as well use USM LoL!

Not much chance of getting a Construction number then?

Old Shape, I shoot Jpeg. And I normally sharpen on CS3 with between 90 and 140 USM depending on the shot. Which I have been told is excessive despite having far more rejections for soft than oversharpen.

If you can shoot in raw or tiff, then do so. I used to shoot HiQual Jpeg all the time, but my Jpegs were occupying the same amount of Mb as my raw files. (A raw is 15,000mb and a straight Jpeg shot was about 13,500 anyway). So now I store my Raw in a seperate library, convert them to a medium qual jpeg for fast viewing on the screen….any I like I go back into the raw and play with in CS2………..anyway, I digress.
Unsharp mask, like any sharpening tool is actually a destructive process, it changes the colour/contrast of a pixel to make it contrast with the ones next to it. So, instead of hitting USM in a single hit of 90, do it 9 times at 10. Your will see a massive difference (Well, I can!). This also has the benefit of you being ables to step backward slowly using the history tools.
Also consider adding a copy layer, then selecting Filter/Other/High Pass. The screen will go grey. Now select (From the opacity drop-down menu) the ttpe of blend you want. I suggest Soft Light as a good starter…..but play about to your tastes. A gentle USM on top of that and you will see better results.

Please post to the forum the picture you set as an example, plus the exif data…..which you will need to type in as I’ve not found a way of getting hold of exif data in a “Copy/paste” format.

Yes, I do have a filter, however I believe the problems have been going on longer than I have had the filter. Although it is a possibility.

I can’t get out to do any tests this weekend as the weather is foul. I’ll try hopefully next weekend.

The picture on your initial link has been deleted by the host.
Post some in the thread please.
You didn’t state what sort of processing you are doing, and if you are shooting in RAW, Tiff or Jpeg…..all of which are “Soft” without some sort of sharpening. RAW is actually the softest, but can certainly end up as the sharpest.

Hi
Justa quick one, im currently building a workshop, since we moved, i lost my old one. Were now finaly settled and sorting the rubbish in the garage. Now 1/2 of it is plastered so i was considering doing the other half to make it abit more of a bareable place to work and keep it alittle bit drier.

Now im pllaing on doing it this weekend before i assemble my nice new workbench and finish the racking and shelving.

So what i want to know is how hard can it be? I dont want a great finish as its just a garage

Cheers

And?
Post pictures of your handiwork, for the Forum’s meriment. 😉

I was agreeing with you.

Oh LoL, the A was Agreement. I thought you were calling me an ****ho*e.

Cheers.

There doesn’t need to be a practical benefit.

We do it because we are the curious ape, old shape.
We simply have to know what makes things work. It’s in our genes.

Whilst we do have the curiosity, there is more to this than we mortals are told.
Curiosity would not draw the trillions of bucks required for such projects. Such research doesn’t get funding unless there is a better weapon at the end of it.
We didn’t go to the Moon to see what it was made of, that’s a spin-off benefit.
I could have gone into science, I was top at Physics, a bit of a geek. But, I found out that unless you are the head of a project, with a budget….the salary is on a par with a fast food no-stars.