Digilux 2 sharpening

[Guest purpledot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Like a few others recently I have also acquired a Digilux 2 - although mine is still to arrive I have tried searching the forums (my apologies in advance if I have missed the posts) for advice on post processing - in particular how much "unsharp" people use in PSE6. Any input on that much appreciated.

 

Regards

Karspoul

[Overgaard]

I don't sharpen originals but sharpen for different editions.

 

For print I use an automated Action from Getty where, amongst other things, the lightest channel is selected out and (only that one) is applied Amount 99%, Radius 1.5 Pixel, Threshold 1 (lab color mode, than back to RGB after that).

 

For web I prepare the final size in 72 dpi and then run Filter > Sharpen > Smart Sharpen i Photoshop CS3. I change between 1,0 and 1,4 but else these are my settings. It's a bit fake to choose "Lens Blur" but it works for web resolution, so why not:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jerryharwood]

Hi, I'm glad you are getting a Digilux 2 ! I bought mine originally in 2002, when they first came out- I still have it; it only went back to Solms last November for a new sensor, so i think for a Digital cam, thats not bad.

As the image comes out of the camera, the first thing I do, is to up the resolution from 72ppi to 300. then in ps CS2, i use smart sharpen 50-75% radius 1, threshold 2-3, depending on the subject. If you select motion blur, and use the selctor wheel to determine which way to use the smart sharpen effect- easier to see than describe, you will find it works just fine.

 

One word of caution, foliage on trees more than say 50 yards away, does not record very well, due to the low sensor range; but for everything else, it is OK. Also, brilliant for night shots, and close up work. Mine has paid for itself twice over ! enjoy

[wparsonsgisnet]

I have never sharpened with either my D2 or my M8.

 

However, I do use noise reduction sw, in my case Neat Image.

 

Nevertheless, and thanks to overgaard, I have noted the sharpening techniques described above.

[John Thawley]

I've backed way off how much I "sharpen" my Digilux 2 images compared to my Canon files.

 

Since they're not relevant to Photoshop settings, I can only tell you that in Aperture, I use the default sharpening, noise reduction, and vignette settings.

 

Of course minor exposure, contrast and saturation adjustments... but I'm finding more and more, they need very little. The only exception is indoor lighting. Bit of a chase there.

 

I find that Aperture's default settings of Noise Reduction, Sharpening and Vignette are SO subtle... they border on perfect. The vignette tool is ever so-slight and actually softens the corners more than it darkens... very "film" like.

 

JT

 

PS: I'm currently the proud owner of four Digilux 2 cameras as of this morning... me thinks two of them will have to go. Not sure... we'll see. LOL

[MPerson]

Isn't the first part of the equation your in camera settings for the JPG? Contrast, sharpening & saturation.

 

I always shoot RAW- I'm not in a hurry - for B&W conversion in Lightroom or Light Zone but any thoughts?

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... PS: I'm currently the proud owner of four Digilux 2 cameras as of this morning...

Tell us more, John - how did that happen?

 

Pete.

[Overgaard]

John,

 

What's that with FOUR Digilux 2 cameras?

 

I've been playing with the idea of getting three more (for wife and my twin daughter/son) but I haven't made the move yet.

 

Also, on Aperture. I'm in a mess because I have Lightroom, Capture One, FlexColor, Phocus and now Aperture (I've used Lightroom and FlexColor for DMR files). But here's the question: Do you shoot Digilux JPG's and import them via Aperture? Please describe your workflow a little more if that's the case.

 

(As you've seen in one of the articles I sent you, I do some PS work on D2 files as a standard measure).

 

 

...

 

 

...

 

 

Four!

 

You're the man!

[John Thawley]

Isn't the first part of the equation your in camera settings for the JPG? Contrast, sharpening & saturation.

 

I always shoot RAW- I'm not in a hurry - for B&W conversion in Lightroom or Light Zone but any thoughts?

 

Not really... since its a matter of taste and might differ with each image and subject.

 

JT

[John Thawley]

Tell us more, John - how did that happen?

 

Pete.

 

Thorsten Overgaard kept insisting a small Leica doctor in white coat and heavy black framed glasses will come running and scratch your leg when the motive is focus.. I've yet to find one that does that... so, I keep buying.

 

Seriously, though... I am so enamored with this camera that I am searching for at least two that are in absolute pristine condition. The first was a nice camera but showed significant signs (cosmetically) of wear.... though functions flawlessly. The second is in very nice condition... only slight swirl scuffs by the strap. Two more will be here tomorrow. One is described as "MINT" with the exception of marks from tripod mounting... money-back promise. The second (and I think this is the gem) is from an estate. The camera belonged to a gentleman now deceased. I am promised it is "NEW".... it appears the fellow must have walked into the Leica dealer and basically said I need everything. It's got the dedicated leather case and an SF24D flash included. Quite a nice package, really.

 

So, I will sell one for sure. I will probably put the cleanest one away. Then the other two will be off to be wrapped in leather. One black, one tobacco brown. I already got the straps from Luigi. So, these will be great cameras and personalized to me.

 

My Canon gear gets so abused dragging it around the country side, so the Leica's are my Sunday drivers.

 

Oh, I'll probably part with the Digilux 3 now as well. After that, I'll figure out moving the D-Lux 3 for a D-Lux 4.... with a viewfinder and a small Leica doctor in white coat and heavy black framed glasses will come running and scratch your leg when the motive is focus.

 

JT

[John Thawley]

John,

 

What's that with FOUR Digilux 2 cameras?

 

I've been playing with the idea of getting three more (for wife and my twin daughter/son) but I haven't made the move yet.

 

Also, on Aperture. I'm in a mess because I have Lightroom, Capture One, FlexColor, Phocus and now Aperture (I've used Lightroom and FlexColor for DMR files). But here's the question: Do you shoot Digilux JPG's and import them via Aperture? Please describe your workflow a little more if that's the case.

 

(As you've seen in one of the articles I sent you, I do some PS work on D2 files as a standard measure).

 

 

...

 

 

...

 

 

Four!

 

You're the man!

 

Four is explained above.

 

Thorsten.... Aperture has literally changed my life... with respect to work. I honestly believe I probably won't buy CS4 - Photoshop. What I use Photoshop for, CS3 will work fine. I've been a Photoshop user since PS3.

 

I have gone through all the gymnastics of different work flows... iView Media Pro, Photo Mechanic, Lightroom (early) etc. Though I have not used CaptureOne.

 

There's a fairly descriptive workflow entry on my blog... and I posted one here on L-Camera as well.

 

In short, I can promise you there is no editing adjustment that you perform that you can't duplicate in Aperture. The hurdle is retraining the mental muscles and adjusting your eye to getting comfortable with your adjustment inputs to match what you're seeking in output. Believe it or not, after six months in Aperture, I can't "hit my marks" in Photoshop anymore.... and that's after editing 500 images per event for the past six years. I know all the functions... but I can't "snap" to the finish I want.

 

So... first, understand, I allow Aperture to MANAGE my files. They're in the Aperture database. I learned after six months, the Aperture folder / database structure was FAR MORE reliable than my strict folder hierarchy I'd been using for years. And, contrary to what others beleive, the folder structure is completely accessible and extremely logical... but you don't have to worry about it.

 

So... card goes in the reader. Files come into Aperture PROJECT with my copyright information, contact information, file naming convention (personal) and of course all the embedded EXIF. This is ALL complete on import.

 

Once thumbnails are visible, I will go through rejecting misses and out-of-focus etc. image. Images that are good will get 0 stars... images that I like will get 3 stars. When I'm done, I'll pull up the 3 stars and find the ones I REALLY like, tweak them and give them 5 stars.

 

Now that may vary a bit.. and keep in mind, because of the key board shortcuts allowing me to navigate the screen at will, I'll typically do the above steps at full screen. A quick it of the Z key will zoom in a 100% or I can hit the ~ key to bring up the Loupe. So all of this has become very intuitive and gets me where I need to be rather quickly.

 

As far as the adjustments, while in full screen view, I hit H and bring up the adjustment palette. Typically, there will be several shots in a row that have the same conditions.... I can adjust the first one, then "lift" those adjustments and then "stamp" them on the rest. Of course all of this is NON-DESTRUCTIVE to the original file. And, the "version" being created isn't really an image file at all. It's simply and XML file of the instructions for the adjustments overlaid to the Master file. The master is always intact and I can quickly revert to it by striking the M key.

 

So, now a quick sort of the 5 star images, select all the thumbnails, hit Export via FTP, tell Aperture to make the images 800px on the longest side and to add my watermark, and CLICK... the images are being sized and uploaded to the appropriate FTP site. And, BTW, those 800 pixel images NEVER reside on my local machine... they are created and transmitted. End of story.

 

As far as RAW images, Aperture doesn't care. They are displayed inline along with all the other images. The only time you're aware that you're dealing with a RAW file is there are a few extra adjustment sliders on the Adjustment palette. They're just there.

 

So, my weekend consists of walking the race track for hours on end... shooting approximately 1500-2000 frame per day. At the end of three days, I'll have 500 or so adjusted images put to bed and getting on a plane to fly home. Typically, all I'm doing when I get home is going through looking for one or two portfolio pieces for myself.

 

I can't stress enough how important this type of management is to the working photographer. For those 500 or so "keepers' I'm spending 2-3 minutes max on adjustments. Now, that's not to say I might spend more time polishing an image later.... say for high end commercial use etc.

 

The big step is commitment. As long as you try to use your other programs, you'll never make the switch. Aperture (as I suppose Lightroom is too) is not a program you try or use for this and that. It's really more of a photographer's operating system. Typically there are two ro three different ways to do the same thing... it's done purposely so you can tailor your workflow to suit YOU. There are tons of other features that streamline the process.... but the key is learning all the functions of the program and then taking control of it and making it YOUR working environment.

 

I took the two day certification about a year ago. I already had a full year under my belt, but I wanted to be sure I was up-to-speed on all of it. For the most part I was... but I'm incredibly fast with it now and can toss it around at will. It's a beautiful thing.

 

Sorry for getting preachy.... but I'm a true believer in digital asset management. And that's what this is all about. The "post process" work we do only uses about 10% of the power of Photoshop... it's overkill. And now, there are so many plug-ins for Aperture... it's become a no-brainer. The only place Aperture trails Photoshop (and I think by design) is pixel manipulation. Cloning is limite. Masking is non-existent. But that's it. 99% of what you do 99% of the time, can be done.

 

You have my email.

 

Sorry for hi-jacking this thread.

 

JT

[Overgaard]

Thanks. That's great and I remember having read some about this in your blog too. It's just ... I don't like learning new stuff ;-)

 

I believe in Aperture being a system in the future, on long term. Lightroom with Adobe being it as well, but there's bigger chance I'll have Mac for many years, than Adobe.

 

For now I can't get the look of DMR files right in Aperture but haven't worked that much with it. But I need to redefine my workflow as iView Media Pro (or Microsoft Express as it's called now) doesn't do the job of DAM (Digital Asset Management).

 

... hmm, I start to like the thought of just one program, for many reasons. Also, the b&w and color film effects can be integrated in Aperture.

[stuny]

John - What a spectacular site with many of the best racing images I can recall!

[John Thawley]

Thanks. That's great and I remember having read some about this in your blog too. It's just ... I don't like learning new stuff ;-)

Careful... that's a sign of getting old. LOL - I remind myself to learn every time I see the glee in my six year-old's eyes when he discovers he can do something we all take for granted.

 

I believe in Aperture being a system in the future, on long term. Lightroom with Adobe being it as well, but there's bigger chance I'll have Mac for many years, than Adobe.

I think Apple has more incentive to build Aperture as a pro-app and assume the position as a leader as they have done with Final Cut. In addition, I see Adobe ultimately having a conflict with having to segment it's own market share if Lightroom goes to far into Photoshop's domain. They're in a tough spot. They have to fend off Apple... but in the process will the build Lightroom as a Photoshop killer? Most photographers really only use about 10% of Photoshops capabilities... if that.

 

For now I can't get the look of DMR files right in Aperture but haven't worked that much with it.

Those are the mental muscles I was referring too. My life was happy editing in Photoshop... I could make those babies really shine. At first getting the same look from Aperture was a challenge and hit and miss. But once I got the feel of each slider and what the input/output ratios changed on my screen, life became good again. And now, with later versions, they keep adding tools that actually effect how I can adjust and control the image. This I REALLY like. Of the last several versions of Photoshop, what they added (and what I paid through the nose for) didn't really do anything to change how I edited photos. Yes, I had more tools for Photo CHOP... but not solid additions for day-to-day editing.

 

Lastly, with Aperture's latest editing plug ins, it's just getting stronger and stronger.. and again, they feel more like photographic darkroom editing... and of course the Export plugins make creating a Photoshop "Action" a thing of the past.

 

Having to transmit a considerable number of web images each week, I would sort the photos I wanted, COPY them to a sub folder. Then I would point my Photoshop Action at that folder... which in turn would do all the sizing etc. and then put the lo-res versions in ANOTHER sub-folder. I would wait for that step to be complete... usually 100 or so images... then open up an FTP program and transmit the lo res images.

 

Now, I simply select the thumbnails, export the versions at the specific size while Aperture connects to the FTP server. One step... no extra sub-folders or copies of images (that lead to deleting WRONG folders) and no sitting around to waiting to perform the next step. For me, the latter is very important. It allows me to grab lunch or go and walk around the competitor's paddock... just better use of my time.

 

... hmm, I start to like the thought of just one program, for many reasons. Also, the b&w and color film effects can be integrated in Aperture.

 

Let me know if I can help.

 

JT

[John Thawley]

John - What a spectacular site with many of the best racing images I can recall!

 

That is kind of you to say. Thank you.

[lesh]

John,

 

The photos on your website are fantastic - I also appreciated the insights into your workflow.

You can probably expect the Aperture people to come knocking on your door to say thanks.......

Would just say that a few of the timesaving steps in your routine were familiar since they follow similar paths as those I've read other pro's use with Lightroom.

I became wedded to LR since it arrived on the scene, in part due to there being no stiff hardware requirement as there was with Aperture. No small matter when you're simply a 'happy snapper' who doesn't make a living from it.

Since those days it LR's abilities have become more and more sophisticated and the need to open up Photoshop has become pretty rare. As has been said above I'm sure there's a debate at Adobe on how far they allow LR to encroach on big brothers territory.

[John Thawley]

John,

 

The photos on your website are fantastic - I also appreciated the insights into your workflow.

You can probably expect the Aperture people to come knocking on your door to say thanks.......

Would just say that a few of the timesaving steps in your routine were familiar since they follow similar paths as those I've read other pro's use with Lightroom.

I became wedded to LR since it arrived on the scene, in part due to there being no stiff hardware requirement as there was with Aperture. No small matter when you're simply a 'happy snapper' who doesn't make a living from it.

Since those days it LR's abilities have become more and more sophisticated and the need to open up Photoshop has become pretty rare. As has been said above I'm sure there's a debate at Adobe on how far they allow LR to encroach on big brothers territory.

 

Thank you.

 

Initially, there were things I like about Lightroom too. I'd say my ultimate choice (early on) was a philisophical one based on Apple and their commitment to having Pro Apps well suited to their hardware. For me, that represented a synergistic motivation on Apples part to get it right.

 

That said, though... and two years later, I'm quite sure either flavor will get the job done. Both have the logic of flexibility in order to tailor to the end-user's workflow. So to me, that and the fact that you are using a robust digital asset management tool is what is important.

 

I don't think any of us can honestly say we ever really anticipated the monster we've created in the way of archiving and file management. It is staggering. I have 6TB sitting on my desktop. I easily shoot 10gb per event. I go out with my six year-old and come home with 350 images. LOL

 

I remember telling a friend who was asking about investing in tech stocks (back in 1993). She asked "what should I be looking at." I told her two things ... look at the top companies involved in memory and storage... since those are the file cabinets of the future. And, look at the top companies producing Internet router eqipment. Well, Mr. Smart Guy was talking boldly since he had just bought a 1gb hard drive for his hot road Pentium machine. LOL - WHO KNEW? I mean, I knew I was right... but I didn't know I was THAT right. LOL

 

I always laugh when I'm on the road, I'll be standing in line somewhere ... coffee shot or whatever, and whereas I used to jingle change in my pocket, the change has been replaced by memory cards. I'll usually have a half dozen or so 2GB cards.... and think to myself.. OMG ... I have 12 GIG IN MY POCKET. It's just absurd.

 

Anyway.. keep up the good habits with your Lightroom. It will pay dividends in years to come.

 

JT

[wparsonsgisnet]

John, they are great pix.

 

I notice that all the cars are blonde. cool.

[John Thawley]

John, they are great pix.

 

I notice that all the cars are blonde. cool.

 

And all Corvettes are RED. LOL

 

Thanks,

 

JT

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wparsonsgisnet]

Again, great pix!

 

The web site is also terrific. Congratulations, and what a deal to like what you do in the day job.