Does in camera sharpening occur before jpeg compression?

[Jack O'Neill]

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...

If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper) would then be compressed.

If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format. Correct?

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

 

[kra]

IMHO the in camera sharpening has proven to be superior to software sharpening in PS Elements. As far as TIFF goes, I don't think you want to consider using it. Its very slow and takes up a lot of space on your stick. The difference compared to fine mode is very hard to discern.

Alika

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

 

[Mike K]

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

Faultless logic!

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

Being lossless, TIFF is the default format for photography professionals, despite its size. JPEG wil gradually lose image quality though many cylcles of saves due to compression artifacts, which compound. Unfortaunately, Sony memory sticks are such a limitation that it is impractical to shoot in TIFF. Shoot in JPEG and after opening your pics, save in TIFF for more relaxed editing.

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

You do not lose detail by shooting with little (or none) in-camera sharpness. The image is still there to be optimized. Digital sharpness is edge contrast (which is amplified though software) not ture detail. Photoshop unsharp mask is capable of performing a better job of sharpening than in-camera algorithms since it is much more flexible and can be optimized for each type of image. This edge contrast makes it easier for our eye to pick out detail but does not create it. On the downside it can also amplify noise. Even film scans always use some sharpening prior to printing.

You have hit the nail on the head with regard to JPEG compression and sharpening. On the other end, it is important to do minimal sharpening until after edting and upsampling are complete. Upsampling for enlargements (pixel interpolation) will round off the sharpenend edges (amplified contrast) thus sharpening should always be applied after upsampling and just prior to printing. Here is some reading on the topic of sharpening:
http://users.supernet.com/guntcher/sharpen/unsharp.htm
http://www.scantips.com/simple6.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html?cprose=I39
There are seveal other sharpening programs available, Pekka uses this one:
http://www.sonic.net/webpub/ultra-sharpen/ultra-sharpen.html
Regards, Mike K

 

[Mike K]

IMHO the in camera sharpening has proven to be superior to software
sharpening in PS Elements. As far as TIFF goes, I don't think you
want to consider using it. Its very slow and takes up a lot of
space on your stick. The difference compared to fine mode is very
hard to discern.

Untrue. Here is the result from another thread in this Sony forum from 5 days ago. If you cannot get PS unsharp mask to appear as good or better than in-camera sharpening, I would suggest a bit of training.

Platyase wrote:

On Lucien's suggestion, I did try playing around with the unsharp mask to see if I could get a -2 sharpening image to look like a +2 sharpening image. Adjusting the three variables(in photoshop unsharp mask), I was able to get something of the effect, but since my evaluation of "looking like" is subjective, it wouldn't be meaningful to get quantitative noise measurements from that.

One thing I did notice is that, when blown up, the +2 sharpened image had annoying artifacts around high contrast edges. The -2 sharpened image with unsharp mask applied had less of the artifacts, even when I adjusted the unsharp mask so that they had a similar haloing effect around the edges.

I suspect this may be due to JPEG artifacts around the sharpened edge. JPEG artifacts are less noticeable with smoother images, and hence the -2 sharpened image had no visible artifacts. This would be another point supporting Mike K and Pondria's suggesting that sharpening should be applied at the last stage for best image quality.

And here is the thread from which this post was extracted:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&page=1&message=1138010
Regards, Mike K

 

[Jack O'Neill]

Thanks Mike,
I'll take a look at these links and do some experimenting.

I'm wondering if the S75 does the sharpening before or after it does the jpeg compression.

Jack

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

Faultless logic!

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

Being lossless, TIFF is the default format for photography
professionals, despite its size. JPEG wil gradually lose image
quality though many cylcles of saves due to compression artifacts,
which compound. Unfortaunately, Sony memory sticks are such a
limitation that it is impractical to shoot in TIFF. Shoot in JPEG
and after opening your pics, save in TIFF for more relaxed editing.

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

You do not lose detail by shooting with little (or none) in-camera
sharpness. The image is still there to be optimized. Digital
sharpness is edge contrast (which is amplified though software) not
ture detail. Photoshop unsharp mask is capable of performing a
better job of sharpening than in-camera algorithms since it is much
more flexible and can be optimized for each type of image. This
edge contrast makes it easier for our eye to pick out detail but
does not create it. On the downside it can also amplify noise.
Even film scans always use some sharpening prior to printing.
You have hit the nail on the head with regard to JPEG compression
and sharpening. On the other end, it is important to do minimal
sharpening until after edting and upsampling are complete.
Upsampling for enlargements (pixel interpolation) will round off
the sharpenend edges (amplified contrast) thus sharpening should
always be applied after upsampling and just prior to printing.
Here is some reading on the topic of sharpening:
http://users.supernet.com/guntcher/sharpen/unsharp.htm
http://www.scantips.com/simple6.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html?cprose=I39
There are seveal other sharpening programs available, Pekka uses
this one:
http://www.sonic.net/webpub/ultra-sharpen/ultra-sharpen.html
Regards, Mike K

 

[Ronald E. Chambers]

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount -- there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation / subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

I'm wondering if the S75 does the sharpening before or after it
does the jpeg compression.

Jack

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

Faultless logic!

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

Being lossless, TIFF is the default format for photography
professionals, despite its size. JPEG wil gradually lose image
quality though many cylcles of saves due to compression artifacts,
which compound. Unfortaunately, Sony memory sticks are such a
limitation that it is impractical to shoot in TIFF. Shoot in JPEG
and after opening your pics, save in TIFF for more relaxed editing.

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

You do not lose detail by shooting with little (or none) in-camera
sharpness. The image is still there to be optimized. Digital
sharpness is edge contrast (which is amplified though software) not
ture detail. Photoshop unsharp mask is capable of performing a
better job of sharpening than in-camera algorithms since it is much
more flexible and can be optimized for each type of image. This
edge contrast makes it easier for our eye to pick out detail but
does not create it. On the downside it can also amplify noise.
Even film scans always use some sharpening prior to printing.
You have hit the nail on the head with regard to JPEG compression
and sharpening. On the other end, it is important to do minimal
sharpening until after edting and upsampling are complete.
Upsampling for enlargements (pixel interpolation) will round off
the sharpenend edges (amplified contrast) thus sharpening should
always be applied after upsampling and just prior to printing.
Here is some reading on the topic of sharpening:
http://users.supernet.com/guntcher/sharpen/unsharp.htm
http://www.scantips.com/simple6.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html?cprose=I39
There are seveal other sharpening programs available, Pekka uses
this one:
http://www.sonic.net/webpub/ultra-sharpen/ultra-sharpen.html
Regards, Mike K

 

[Mike K]

I totally agree with Ronald on the sharpening order.

As far as workflow, I have been following several photoshop books which suggest it is far more effective to contol most color casts with the three individual levels channels and avoid the use of contrast and brightness controls. Any other color adjustments can be made with curves, which can be VERY involved. The pros also suggest doing upsampling after all of the above editing so that if one wanted different size prints you wouldn't have to do all the color editing over again. Save a copy just before upsampling as the master. Then resize, apply unsharp mask and print. The other steps I also do in approximately Ronalds order, only resize next to last.
Regards, Mike K

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[Jack O'Neill]

Thanks Ron & Mike,

I see that this is the right way to do it, but does Sony do it that way inside the camera.

After you push the shutter button and the untouched image is captured, what order does Sony do the adjustments of WB, EV,sharpening and JPEG compression.
Is this a secret recipe or does anyone know?

Jack

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[Ronald E. Chambers]

I actually do levels and curves before resample. Sorry for misinfo.

In the cameras, I'd bet the order is:
EV (may be in a to d conversion)
WB

interpolation of pixels from Bayer format (many forget this step which is a smoothing like operation -- especially on r and b)
sharpening (cosmetic to cover smoothing from interpolation)
jpeg (last for sure)

Think of the cost:
EV on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
WB on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
interpolation on 3-4mp in Bayer format to full rgb of 9-12mp
sharpen 9-12mp
jpeg 9-12mp to 1mb file

RON C

PS Bayer format is:
GRGR ........
BGBG .......
GRGR .......
BG etc.

After you push the shutter button and the untouched image is
captured, what order does Sony do the adjustments of WB,
EV,sharpening and JPEG compression.
Is this a secret recipe or does anyone know?

Jack

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[mvdude]

As long as we're drifting into this topic...

Unsharp mask:
Amount/Strength = 100%
Threshold/Clipping = 2
Radius = adjust to taste between .5 and 1

This works well for most situations in most photo editing programs.

Avoid Brightness/Contrast! These are very destructive. Better to use Levels and Hue/Sat/Lightness.

 

[platyase]

EV is a function of the shutter speed and aperture, so these are taken care of as the picture is being taken. JPEG compression must happen last since further modifications to the image would require uncompressing and recompressing it. (Well, it is true that limited color correction can be performed without uncompressing JPEG data.)

So the only thing left is the order of WB and sharpening. My guess would be that WB occurs before sharpening. At least, that's what Ron, Mike, and I would do if we were doing it in software.

It is at least mathematically possible that Sony does WB, sharpening, and JPEG compression all at once. All three at once is unlikely, but WB and sharpening in one step is conceivable. They are both just mathematical functions acting on pixel values, and there may be savings in processing time by applying the composition of the functions once instead of the two functions sequentially. But all this doesn't really matter to us.

To continue this train of thought into the realm of irrelevancy and impracticability, it would be theoretically possible to construct a smart CCD which combines exposure, WB, and sharpening. Each CCD well could individually control its sensitivity to light. An extension would be each well shutting itself off when it has reached capacity and recording its time to capacity. This would solve the issue of overblown highlights. If a CCD shuts itself off at 1/1000s on a 1/500s exposure, then simply multiply its level by 2 to get the correct value for that pixel.

Sharpening could be applied on the CCD level by the wells communicating to each other and regulating the sensitivity of neighboring wells. In fact, this is how cones in the eyes work. Sharpening is applied at the retina before the image enters the brain. The rods and cones also individually adjust their sensitivity based on the present image. That's why when you stare at a colored square for a while and then look at a white wall, you'll see a complementary colored square on the wall.

But I'm just blabbing right now... I'm not suggesting that this is actually a good way of constructing a CCD.

****

After you push the shutter button and the untouched image is
captured, what order does Sony do the adjustments of WB,
EV,sharpening and JPEG compression.
Is this a secret recipe or does anyone know?

Jack

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[kra]

Mike,

As the thread says, it was a subjective opinion. I have actually tried it. Have you? Before you call me a liar, I would appreciate first hand knowledge.

IMHO the in camera sharpening has proven to be superior to software
sharpening in PS Elements. As far as TIFF goes, I don't think you
want to consider using it. Its very slow and takes up a lot of
space on your stick. The difference compared to fine mode is very
hard to discern.

Untrue. Here is the result from another thread in this Sony forum
from 5 days ago. If you cannot get PS unsharp mask to appear as
good or better than in-camera sharpening, I would suggest a bit of
training.

Platyase wrote:
On Lucien's suggestion, I did try playing around with the unsharp
mask to see if I could get a -2 sharpening image to look like a +2
sharpening image. Adjusting the three variables(in photoshop
unsharp mask), I was able to get something of the effect, but since
my evaluation of "looking like" is subjective, it wouldn't be
meaningful to get quantitative noise measurements from that.

One thing I did notice is that, when blown up, the +2 sharpened
image had annoying artifacts around high contrast edges. The -2
sharpened image with unsharp mask applied had less of the
artifacts, even when I adjusted the unsharp mask so that they had a
similar haloing effect around the edges.

I suspect this may be due to JPEG artifacts around the sharpened
edge. JPEG artifacts are less noticeable with smoother images, and
hence the -2 sharpened image had no visible artifacts. This would
be another point supporting Mike K and Pondria's suggesting that
sharpening should be applied at the last stage for best image
quality.

And here is the thread from which this post was extracted:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&page=1&message=1138010
Regards, Mike K

 

[Jack O'Neill]

I actually do levels and curves before resample. Sorry for misinfo.

In the cameras, I'd bet the order is:
EV (may be in a to d conversion)
WB
interpolation of pixels from Bayer format (many forget this step
which is a smoothing like operation -- especially on r and b)
sharpening (cosmetic to cover smoothing from interpolation)
jpeg (last for sure)

Hi Ron,

If this is the case, then if I set sharpening to -2 in the camera and do the sharpening afterwards...I'm doing the sharpening to an image that has allready been compressed..ie I'm sharpening an image thats been slightly corrupted by the jpeg compression process. This is why I'm asking why it would not be better to do it in the camera, that way the original image is being sharpened, instead of an image thats gone through the jpeg process.

I'll try to use some of these tools this weekend that mike gave the link to earlier and I'll let you know how it turns out.

Jack

Think of the cost:
EV on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
WB on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
interpolation on 3-4mp in Bayer format to full rgb of 9-12mp
sharpen 9-12mp
jpeg 9-12mp to 1mb file

RON C

PS Bayer format is:
GRGR ........
BGBG .......
GRGR .......
BG etc.

After you push the shutter button and the untouched image is
captured, what order does Sony do the adjustments of WB,
EV,sharpening and JPEG compression.
Is this a secret recipe or does anyone know?

Jack

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[Dan43018]

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

Faultless logic!

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

Being lossless, TIFF is the default format for photography
professionals, despite its size. JPEG wil gradually lose image
quality though many cylcles of saves due to compression artifacts,
which compound. Unfortaunately, Sony memory sticks are such a
limitation that it is impractical to shoot in TIFF. Shoot in JPEG
and after opening your pics, save in TIFF for more relaxed editing.

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

You do not lose detail by shooting with little (or none) in-camera
sharpness. The image is still there to be optimized. Digital
sharpness is edge contrast (which is amplified though software) not
ture detail. Photoshop unsharp mask is capable of performing a
better job of sharpening than in-camera algorithms since it is much
more flexible and can be optimized for each type of image. This
edge contrast makes it easier for our eye to pick out detail but
does not create it. On the downside it can also amplify noise.
Even film scans always use some sharpening prior to printing.
You have hit the nail on the head with regard to JPEG compression
and sharpening. On the other end, it is important to do minimal
sharpening until after edting and upsampling are complete.
Upsampling for enlargements (pixel interpolation) will round off
the sharpenend edges (amplified contrast) thus sharpening should
always be applied after upsampling and just prior to printing.
Here is some reading on the topic of sharpening:
http://users.supernet.com/guntcher/sharpen/unsharp.htm
http://www.scantips.com/simple6.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html?cprose=I39
There are seveal other sharpening programs available, Pekka uses
this one:
http://www.sonic.net/webpub/ultra-sharpen/ultra-sharpen.html
Regards, Mike K

Mike:

Thanks....this response has helped me a lot.

Dan

 

[Ronald E. Chambers]

Jack,
Even though you set it to -2 your are still getting some sharpening.

It would be best to record in tif format but I can't afford the Memory Sticks. Therefore I and you(??) have to live with the jpeggies.

If light is good when you shoot, you won't notice the jpeggies unless you magnify a bunch.

If very dark, you see interpolation noise, blooming????, and the jpeggies with low miagnification.

If I can help, please holler.
RON C

I actually do levels and curves before resample. Sorry for misinfo.

In the cameras, I'd bet the order is:
EV (may be in a to d conversion)
WB
interpolation of pixels from Bayer format (many forget this step
which is a smoothing like operation -- especially on r and b)
sharpening (cosmetic to cover smoothing from interpolation)
jpeg (last for sure)

Hi Ron,
If this is the case, then if I set sharpening to -2 in the camera
and do the sharpening afterwards...I'm doing the sharpening to an
image that has allready been compressed..ie I'm sharpening an image
thats been slightly corrupted by the jpeg compression process. This
is why I'm asking why it would not be better to do it in the
camera, that way the original image is being sharpened, instead of
an image thats gone through the jpeg process.

I'll try to use some of these tools this weekend that mike gave the
link to earlier and I'll let you know how it turns out.

Jack

Think of the cost:
EV on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
WB on full 3-4mp in Bayer format
interpolation on 3-4mp in Bayer format to full rgb of 9-12mp
sharpen 9-12mp
jpeg 9-12mp to 1mb file

RON C

PS Bayer format is:
GRGR ........
BGBG .......
GRGR .......
BG etc.

After you push the shutter button and the untouched image is
captured, what order does Sony do the adjustments of WB,
EV,sharpening and JPEG compression.
Is this a secret recipe or does anyone know?

Jack

Guys,
Nothing is done after compressing to jpeg other than possible
roatation.

With the 505v, I have the sharpening set for the least amount --
there is no zero sharpening.

I then record with the highest natural resolution (no extra
interpolation) in jpg format.

From there it is up to me and PhotoShop to do the job of
perspective and lens corrections (must be done on unprocess image),

rotation / cropping,

extra color correction (if needed), resampling (interpolation /
subsampling - if needed-depends on cropping and desired output),

either levels or curves adjustment (if needed),

and then sharpening (almost alway last and in moderation).

Soon, jpeg will be replaced by JPEG2000 which will do a better job
of compression and of presering the image -- many fewer artifacts.

CHEERS,
RON C

 

[Ed (;¬ >)]

Hi Ron,
If this is the case, then if I set sharpening to -2 in the camera
and do the sharpening afterwards...I'm doing the sharpening to an
image that has allready been compressed..ie I'm sharpening an image
thats been slightly corrupted by the jpeg compression process. This
is why I'm asking why it would not be better to do it in the
camera, that way the original image is being sharpened, instead of
an image thats gone through the jpeg process.

If I understand correctly the posts here as well as the pages on those excellent links, one should choose the most minimal sharpening in camera because it functions on the entire image without being able to make a subjective judgement.

There may be areas of the image that you would not want sharpened, like noise for example. Once the camera does sharpening it's not possible to undo it in post processing.

I had set my sharpening to 0 until I learned that meant 'average' sharpening iinstead of no sharpening. It's now at -2.

 

[L L]

--
[Think Twice] Ay-Eighty it!
© 2004

 

[Anson MacLauchlan]

Does anyone know if in camera sharpening is applied before jpeg
compression takes place? I would think it is.
Let me think a second...
If the image is softer(unsharpened), then compressed(loss of
oringinal data), then sharpened in camera. You would be sharpening
some of the jpeg artifacts..right?

Faultless logic!

If it is sharpened before compression, the best image(sharper)
would then be compressed.
If this is the case, then to get the best sharpening from software
on the pc you would want to capture the image in tiff format.
Correct?

Being lossless, TIFF is the default format for photography
professionals, despite its size. JPEG wil gradually lose image
quality though many cylcles of saves due to compression artifacts,
which compound. Unfortaunately, Sony memory sticks are such a
limitation that it is impractical to shoot in TIFF. Shoot in JPEG
and after opening your pics, save in TIFF for more relaxed editing.

I know you have more control on the PC...amount of sharpening and
where. But is it reaaly best to disable in camera sharpening and do
it in software.

If I set to -2 to disable, then bring the image into photoshop. I
loose some of the image detail that was there when sharpening wa
set to +1 and I can't seem to recover that detail.

any knowledge, experience or opinions on this?

Thanks
Jack

You do not lose detail by shooting with little (or none) in-camera
sharpness. The image is still there to be optimized. Digital
sharpness is edge contrast (which is amplified though software) not
ture detail. Photoshop unsharp mask is capable of performing a
better job of sharpening than in-camera algorithms since it is much
more flexible and can be optimized for each type of image. This
edge contrast makes it easier for our eye to pick out detail but
does not create it. On the downside it can also amplify noise.
Even film scans always use some sharpening prior to printing.
You have hit the nail on the head with regard to JPEG compression
and sharpening. On the other end, it is important to do minimal
sharpening until after edting and upsampling are complete.
Upsampling for enlargements (pixel interpolation) will round off
the sharpenend edges (amplified contrast) thus sharpening should
always be applied after upsampling and just prior to printing.
Here is some reading on the topic of sharpening:
http://users.supernet.com/guntcher/sharpen/unsharp.htm
http://www.scantips.com/simple6.html
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/11242.html?cprose=I39
There are seveal other sharpening programs available, Pekka uses
this one:
http://www.sonic.net/webpub/ultra-sharpen/ultra-sharpen.html
Regards, Mike K

Mike:

Thanks....this response has helped me a lot.

Dan

 

[Anson MacLauchlan]

this thread got me to think'n and 'ureka' I believe I have learned another great lesson on STF

...please advice!

...a bit of an explanation, followed by a question/request for your advice!

I use a F828 and have been leaning greatly on the Histogram for correct exposue (at least exposure that pleases my eye!)

I find that my eye prefers a more saturated/contrasty/richer photo, as a result I have to date, tended to (generally) keep the the Histogram closer to the middle if not slightly left (underexposed) of middle.

The challenge I have recently learned, is that to (slightly/greatly)underexpose the photo, one will have created more noise than necessary, therefore one should consistanly lean towards the right side of the histogram (then post process for saturation/richness in PhotoShop)

for example..one of numerous threads I have found on this subject - http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=11739880

I also have learned on STF, that most of STF's pros, set their camera on Real vs. Standard and then process in PS for the richness/contrast/hue, and have followed this recommendation, as well.'

So, I tried the following example in Photo Shop with an original photo that I generally like, except for the lack of richness/contrast, based on exposing the original to right of center of the histogram.

1 -Original A resized photo



2 -Original A resized photo plus tweaked in PS for levels, saturation and a small amount of unsharp mask



4 - Original B resized photo -out of camera- which I (underexposed) more to my liking (for comparison)



My QUESTION:

am I on the right track and are my current(basic) Photo Shop skills leading me to a higher quality photo

EXIF of Photo A:
Focal Length 20mm
F-Number 3.2
Exposure 1/100 sec
metering - spot
Light Source - Daylight
Exposure Program - Manual
Exp Comp - 0 step
width 2592
height 1944
Hor 72 dpi
Ver 72 dpi
Camera DSC F-828
Color Rep sRGB