Peter Paul
Member
What sharpnesslevel do you use on minolta 7x cameras. Why?
Mostly I prefer the standard setting 0.
Mostly I prefer the standard setting 0.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sharpness setting
- Thread starter Peter Paul
- Start date
Melanie Kipp
Forum Pro
I use the soft setting. I prefer to use unsharpen mask in Photo Shop later.
I think it results in a better finished image.
--
Please visit me at:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com
I think it results in a better finished image.
--
Please visit me at:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com
James de Moye
Well-known member
I did some comparsion shots against my Canon G1 (3.3 MP) and found that with sharpeness at zero (7Hi) that any angular lines had alot more jaggies. The resolution looked lower, even though the 7Hi is 5MP and has lower JPEG compression. As soon as I went to -1 on the softness, all those jaggies went away and the definition of those extra pixels came back. To me soft at zero is to aggressive. I do most of my work on pictures in post anyway, so I can always sharpen it then.
--
Jay
Chuck Gardner
Forum Pro
I own a D7Hi. Page 99 of its manual indicates that both "hard" and "soft" alter the image data, but for "normal" sharpness "no filter is applied".
I prefer to do my manipulation in Photoshop, and sharpen all my images with USM, so I shoot in the unfiltered normal mode.
Chuck Gardner
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I prefer to do my manipulation in Photoshop, and sharpen all my images with USM, so I shoot in the unfiltered normal mode.
Chuck Gardner
--
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Daniella68313
Forum Pro
that is really puzzling..maybe it's a print mistake or a simple tech mistake...but according to dpreview.com test on the dynamic range of the D7, putting the camera in "soft" will give you a decent gain in dynamic range, reducing the risk of blow out highlithg and too dark shadow. Here are the results:
Camera ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
Minolta DiMAGE 7
5mp JPEG FINE
100* 0.13 354:1 8.5 2.5D 51
100 0.14 289:1 8.2 2.5D 49
200 0.22 239:1 7.9 2.4D 48
400 0.41 153:1 7.3 2.2D 44
800 0.98 111:1 6.8 2.0D 41
The difference is not drastic but in some highly contrasting scenes..it can make a big difference..so Soft setting will be the norm for me.
always.
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
Camera ISO Noise Range Bits Density dB
Minolta DiMAGE 7
5mp JPEG FINE
100* 0.13 354:1 8.5 2.5D 51
100 0.14 289:1 8.2 2.5D 49
200 0.22 239:1 7.9 2.4D 48
400 0.41 153:1 7.3 2.2D 44
800 0.98 111:1 6.8 2.0D 41
- In-camera sharpening set to "Soft"
The difference is not drastic but in some highly contrasting scenes..it can make a big difference..so Soft setting will be the norm for me.
always.
--
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
Chuck Gardner
Forum Pro
Something you can test and verify for yourself in the contex of your entire workflow for web and printing when you get your D7.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
--
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Daniella68313
Forum Pro
yes i guess that's the best test. Did you try the different settings for sharpness? If so did you see any increase in the dynamic range?
.
.
Chuck Gardner
Forum Pro
No. As mentioned, for some cameras "soft" would denote no sharpening is applied in camera, but the manual indicates that in not the case for the D7Hi. For the D7Hi "normal" is the unprocessed state. While there might be a noticable difference between "soft" and "normal" straight out of the camera, there wouldn't be a noticable difference by the time I resample and sharpen for both web and printing in Photoshop.
Chuck
Charles Lott
Member
Hello Chuck,
I wonder if Daniella isn't on to something here.
It would be very intersting to repeat your high contrast experiment detailed in the other post using soft versus normal sharpening and see what the impact on the histogram would be.
Charlie
I wonder if Daniella isn't on to something here.
It would be very intersting to repeat your high contrast experiment detailed in the other post using soft versus normal sharpening and see what the impact on the histogram would be.
Charlie
Brivers
Senior Member
If the figures Daniella posted are correct from Phil's review, then why would the dynamic range be increased with a drop back to soft? I'd have to go with what the manual states and I'm taking Chuck at his word that it says normal means no processing which to me seems logical. I'll want to test this out.
Brent
http://www.pbase.com/brivers
Brent
--
http://www.pbase.com/brivers
Brivers
Senior Member
James,
I've also seen the "jaggies" on a few pics viewed by monitor, but not in print. We have to remember the ratio of pixels and how our monitors actually display them. Most monitors aren't able to display above a 4mpixel file so it has to compensate with larger files. You also need to factor in your video card and it's maximum display resolution.
The fact that jaggies exist would support Chuck's observation that no processing occurs in "normal" sharpness setting. This I believe to be true given no anti aliasing is taking place. I know pictures I took with my Casio QV3000 looked great on monitor, but had a "processed" look about them in print. I don't see this with the 7Hi.
Brent
http://www.pbase.com/brivers
I've also seen the "jaggies" on a few pics viewed by monitor, but not in print. We have to remember the ratio of pixels and how our monitors actually display them. Most monitors aren't able to display above a 4mpixel file so it has to compensate with larger files. You also need to factor in your video card and it's maximum display resolution.
The fact that jaggies exist would support Chuck's observation that no processing occurs in "normal" sharpness setting. This I believe to be true given no anti aliasing is taking place. I know pictures I took with my Casio QV3000 looked great on monitor, but had a "processed" look about them in print. I don't see this with the 7Hi.
Brent
--
http://www.pbase.com/brivers
Daniella68313
Forum Pro
yes that's the exact same question i was asking myself..because softening the image will not iincrease the dynamic range. I tried to soften some sample images from dpreview.com and it did not help. applying an unsharp mask made the dynamic range more narrow.
This is very strange. Also according to dprewiew.com it is not only for the D7 but all cameras on soft seams to have a better dynamic range.
There was the same debate in the Olympus forum with some people saying that the soft was a post process and other saying it was no post processing.
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
This is very strange. Also according to dprewiew.com it is not only for the D7 but all cameras on soft seams to have a better dynamic range.
There was the same debate in the Olympus forum with some people saying that the soft was a post process and other saying it was no post processing.
--
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
Daniella68313
Forum Pro
Those tests were for the D7. Maybe it's different for the D7hi and the D7?
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
--
Daniella
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=26918
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
C700 FORUM: http://www.c700uz.com
c700uz, Dimage 7, Tcon14, C210, Cokin 173, Graduated DN, Hoya red Intensifier, Hoya R72 infrared.
Charles Lott
Member
Brent,
The data from the test that say the dyamic range increases with a change in the in-camera sharpening setting from normal to soft. There is no explanation given, just the numbers. So, I don't know why the dynamic range changes.It just appears to. I'll leave the validation of the methodology to those that developed it.
The data quoted is for the D7. I assume that's the case for the 7HI,too. It may not be.
In the meantime, I'm simply suggesting that Chuck had a high contrast stiuation that could possibly be checked out with changes to the in-camera sharpness to see if helps deal with those tough situations. Another tool, if you will. I wasn't poking my finger in Chuck's eye or anybody else's.
The manual for the 7HI says the normal setting for in-camera sharpening is no processing by the camera. I accept that as the way it is.
Best regards,
Charlie
The data from the test that say the dyamic range increases with a change in the in-camera sharpening setting from normal to soft. There is no explanation given, just the numbers. So, I don't know why the dynamic range changes.It just appears to. I'll leave the validation of the methodology to those that developed it.
The data quoted is for the D7. I assume that's the case for the 7HI,too. It may not be.
In the meantime, I'm simply suggesting that Chuck had a high contrast stiuation that could possibly be checked out with changes to the in-camera sharpness to see if helps deal with those tough situations. Another tool, if you will. I wasn't poking my finger in Chuck's eye or anybody else's.
The manual for the 7HI says the normal setting for in-camera sharpening is no processing by the camera. I accept that as the way it is.
Best regards,
Charlie
Hi Peter:
Because there is no filter applied (per the manual, page 97),I use the "Normal" setting.
Once you apply the "Soft" setting, you have permanently lost data. While the "Soft" setting will provide some level of anti-aliasing, not all scenes require it. If I run into a situation where a section of a picture can benefit from anti-aliasing, I will simply apply a blur to that section only.
Regarding Minolta's "Hard" setting - no thank you. Sharpness should be set as a function of the following:
(1) your presentation size (for viewing on the web).
(2) final print size
(3) image details
I have no experience with a 7, 7UG, or a 7Hi.
Hope this helps you out.
Regards,
Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter
http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia
Peter Spiro
Senior Member
I have a recollection that Phil decided a while back that his dynamic range tests were not valid, and that's why he doesn't show numbers for that in the D7i and D7Hi tests.
If that's the case, it's not worth agonizing over this number.
If that's the case, it's not worth agonizing over this number.
Christian Schlager
Member
Hm... wonder why the manual is saying so. It must be an mistake or a fake. If You compare shots with normal and soft settings You can easily see the sharpening artifacts fo the normal setting. An there are a lot of those artifacts. So to get a clean picture it is definitely the best to avoid the NORMAL setting and use USM or the fine SharapControl by Vtie.
Greetings, Christian
Jeremy Rosenberger
Leading Member
Some Bayer interpolation algorithms look similar to sharpening algorithms, so it wouldn't surprise me if Bayer interpolation produced some sharpening-like artifacts. I don't know what algorithm the camera uses, but it's possible that Bayer interpolation is causing the artifacts that you're seeing.
I'm not saying that this is definitely what's happening, so it would still be nice to get some clarification from the authority!
Cheers,
Jeremy
Jeremy L. Rosenberger
http://www.frii.com/~jeremy/
I'm not saying that this is definitely what's happening, so it would still be nice to get some clarification from the authority!
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
Jeremy L. Rosenberger
http://www.frii.com/~jeremy/
Peter Paul
Member
Thanks a lot for all your answers. Experience is worth a lot. Objects that are pretty close are best in softsharpness I think. Sometimes I take landscapes and want to see most objects clearly so normal sharpness will do.Back home I always can use unsharpen mask. Thanks a lot.
Chuck Gardner
Forum Pro
It's not rocket science. Anybody can shoot in all three modes, draw their own conclusions based on their workflows for web and print, and shoot accordingly. However there are so many uncontrolable variables and so much going on it terms of camera image processing to get from photon to bit that it is impossible to draw more than broad general conclusions from ad hoc tests under one set of lighting conditions.
I've been doing photography and color reproduction process control for about 30 years now and have gotten past obsessing on technical minutia. In the final analysis it's a waste of time to debate how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin when you can barely see the pin in the photo under typical viewing conditions.
Dynamic range is NOT the most important factor. Any photographic process, including film, compresses the dynamic range of illumination found in nature. Going from film or bits to ink and paper compresses it further. Understanding how human vision works and how people perceive facimile images is far more important. It is important to have good reference blacks and whites, and good detail and separation (i.e., contrast) in the highlights tones. The human eye is less sensitive to gradations of tone in the shadows. That's not to say shadow detail is not important, but in reality, the way human vision works an extra .50 range in the shadows is not really significant because the eye will not notice it in real life situations. If it comes at the expense of also flattening out the highlights it is actually a detriment.
For example in my contrast series I found that the -2 shots did have more shadow - midtone detail, but overall looked flat compared to normal shot. It's the overall visual impression which is important and it is created by the contrast of light and dark. After all, that is what sharpening does, doesn't it? It increases the contrast at dark/light borders within the image, brightening the brightest highlights in the porcess.
Chuck Gardner
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I've been doing photography and color reproduction process control for about 30 years now and have gotten past obsessing on technical minutia. In the final analysis it's a waste of time to debate how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin when you can barely see the pin in the photo under typical viewing conditions.
Dynamic range is NOT the most important factor. Any photographic process, including film, compresses the dynamic range of illumination found in nature. Going from film or bits to ink and paper compresses it further. Understanding how human vision works and how people perceive facimile images is far more important. It is important to have good reference blacks and whites, and good detail and separation (i.e., contrast) in the highlights tones. The human eye is less sensitive to gradations of tone in the shadows. That's not to say shadow detail is not important, but in reality, the way human vision works an extra .50 range in the shadows is not really significant because the eye will not notice it in real life situations. If it comes at the expense of also flattening out the highlights it is actually a detriment.
For example in my contrast series I found that the -2 shots did have more shadow - midtone detail, but overall looked flat compared to normal shot. It's the overall visual impression which is important and it is created by the contrast of light and dark. After all, that is what sharpening does, doesn't it? It increases the contrast at dark/light borders within the image, brightening the brightest highlights in the porcess.
Chuck Gardner
--
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
http://super.nova.org/PhotoGallery
http://super.nova.org/PhotoClass
http://super.nova.org
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum