# Nikon sharpness adjustments



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Today I attempted to test the sharpness attributes of the D70 and concluded there are no differences.....

Shots of the same subject were taken with tripod and remote triggering to avoid shake.

Normal
Auto
-2
+2

Also what sharpness lacking through the camera can be compinsated with PS, right????

As a result I am satisfied with the Auto setting, but will question higher authority....."youseguys". 

Any comments, suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks..............


----------



## Alex_B (Apr 26, 2008)

I am not a Nikonian, but any sharpness due to the sharpness attributes of the camera should be also reproducible by setting in-camera-sharpening to zero and doing it later on in PS or other software.

However, detail lost due to oversharpening of fine structures in-camera cannot be reconstructed later on.


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Alex_B said:


> I am not a Nikonian, but any sharpness due to the sharpness attributes of the camera should be also reproducible by setting in-camera-sharpening to zero and doing it later on in PS or other software.
> 
> However, detail lost due to oversharpening of fine structures in-camera cannot be reconstructed later on.


 
Hi, Alex.....

Good point, meaning that the Auto setting should be sufficient?


----------



## Alex_B (Apr 26, 2008)

PNA said:


> Hi, Alex.....
> 
> Good point, meaning that the Auto setting should be sufficient?



To answer that, I would need to know how conservative "auto" is, which I do not know. If it is rather aggressive, then there might be the danger of losing detail due to sharpening, if it is rather conservative, and prefers "under-sharpening" then you should be fine.

I personally set my camera (Canon) simply to a low sharpening level and do the final sharpening in PS. I do not have any "auto" setting.


----------



## Arch (Apr 26, 2008)

PNA said:


> Hi, Alex.....
> 
> Good point, meaning that the Auto setting should be sufficient?



Yes i think so myself... i have achieved good sharp results with a D50 and kit lens by using sharpening techniques in PP.
PP is really where you can get the sharpness you want providing the image has no camera shake and is not out of focus.


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Canon????? Hummmm, no Auto??

And it takes pictures????:lmao:


----------



## Alex_B (Apr 26, 2008)

PNA said:


> Canon????? Hummmm, no Auto??
> 
> And it takes pictures????:lmao:



*I* take the picture


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Alex_B said:


> *I* take the picture


 
Woops......


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Alex_B said:


> *I* take the picture


 
And damn good ones too....!!!


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Arch said:


> Yes i think so myself... i have achieved good sharp results with a D50 and kit lens by using sharpening techniques in PP.
> PP is really where you can get the sharpness you want providing the image has no camera shake and is not out of focus.


 
My conclusion also....Thanks.


----------



## Antithesis (Apr 26, 2008)

Are you shooting in RAW? I can't really tell from your description, but if your shooting in RAW, no in-camera processing is done at all. So, no sharpening will be applied.

Oh, and doing sharpening in PS will make your images look a lot better.


----------



## PNA (Apr 26, 2008)

Antithesis said:


> Are you shooting in RAW? I can't really tell from your description, but if your shooting in RAW, no in-camera processing is done at all. So, no sharpening will be applied.
> 
> Oh, and doing sharpening in PS will make your images look a lot better.


 
Yes I shoot in RAW......and thank you for your explanation of the in-camera sharping factor. Makes sense.


----------



## Garbz (Apr 27, 2008)

. Actually the Nikon sharpness isn't bad at +1. But it looks god awful on +2 on every Nikon I've used. And on Normal certain cameras like my D200 never look sharp enough.

That said I don't shoot jpeg anyway.


----------



## Alex_B (Apr 27, 2008)

PNA said:


> And damn good ones too....!!!



Thanks 

On occasion, yes


----------



## Jim H (Apr 27, 2008)

PNA said:


> Today I attempted to test the sharpness attributes of the D70 and concluded there are no differences.....


 Have seen this discussion elsewhere and the conclusion is that many of these advanced settings will only be apparent if imported into your computer via Nikon's CaptureNX. Supposedly the RAW converters in LR/PS, Aperture, CaptureOne, etc do a poor job in handling that data.


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 27, 2008)

Jim H said:


> Have seen this discussion elsewhere and the conclusion is that many of these advanced settings will only be apparent if imported into your computer via Nikon's CaptureNX. Supposedly the RAW converters in LR/PS, Aperture, CaptureOne, etc do a poor job in handling that data.



I must admit I don't see the purpose in shooting Raw and then trying to apply advanced settings.  Isn't the purpose of raw to have unsullied images?


----------



## PNA (Apr 27, 2008)

The_Traveler said:


> I must admit I don't see the purpose in shooting Raw and then trying to apply advanced settings. Isn't the purpose of raw to have unsullied images?


 
Yes, but as in all things, attempts at variations striving for perfection is the order of the day and sharpness is paramount in photos.....


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 27, 2008)

PNA said:


> Yes, but as in all things, attempts at variations striving for perfection is the order of the day and sharpness is paramount in photos.....



Sorry, I don't understand.

If you make adjustments which get applied before you see the raw image, you are working in the dark. You might as well use jpgs.
If you apply changes before seeing the raw image, you have no idea what the actual raw image is and you need to re-zero the settings to see the baseline.
This seems like a waste of time.
Why not make the adjustments in raw as you see you need them?


----------



## PNA (Apr 27, 2008)

The_Traveler said:


> Sorry, I don't understand.
> 
> If you make adjustments which get applied before you see the raw image, you are working in the dark. You might as well use jpgs.
> If you apply changes before seeing the raw image, you have no idea what the actual raw image is and you need to re-zero the settings to see the baseline.
> ...


 
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I am interested in learning how to obtain the sharpest pre PPing shots as a starting point. If the camera does not offer any then yes it is a waste of time. Doesn't it make sense to start with the sharpest RAW and then apply additional changes as "necessary"?


----------



## The_Traveler (Apr 27, 2008)

Oh, I get it.
Sorry.

As I get to be more of a fuss-pot, I find myself doing more that a single global sharpening. I tend to sharpen according to the image characteristics and often sharpen specific areas. (I am a fan of 2 pass sharpening).

I am away for a couple of weeks and consequently will catch up with this thread on my return.

Cheers.

Lew


----------



## PNA (Apr 27, 2008)

Take good care.....


----------



## andrew99 (Apr 27, 2008)

I read somewhere (a magazine, maybe, can't remember) that on mid to high end cameras, the manufacturers set the auto-sharpening to a very mild setting, this is on purpose so that you can control the amount of sharpening later.  

The theory is that if there is not enough sharpening, it's easy to add later, but if there is too much, you're screwed.


----------



## PNA (Apr 27, 2008)

*andrew99* presents an interesting thought and that is, too much beginning sharpness, from the camera, can become a negative factor regarding any post processing, while a softer sharpness can always be sharpened. Hummmm.

What say y'all?


----------

