- Messages
- 3,510
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Landscapes, cars, bigger scenes/birds will take the extra sharpening, but I have found with smaller birds it doesn't take the extra oomph, especially with the larger crops usually involved.
That's interesting. When I first started using LR I watched god knows how many videos from all sorts of folk such as Lydia, and Anthony Morghanti and they were adding 70+ sharpening on a lot of their images so assumed this was the norm
Landscapes, cars, bigger scenes/birds will take the extra sharpening, but I have found with smaller birds it doesn't take the extra oomph, especially with the larger crops usually involved.
@snerkler I think @Swanseajack may be correct, I dont shoot the birds so maybe thats why I dont need to dial in as much, mostly portraits and randoms where I dont need to pull that extreme fine detail.
Thanks guys. that's what I'm starting to think, the larger the crop the more exaggerated the sharpening will look. Yeah @twist, I tend to add more sharpening to wildlife and landscapes than I do people (on the rare occasion I've taken them) and sports etc.
What's odd though is that I've just checked the redpoll shot I keep referring to and it has +74 sharpening and that doesn't look OTT. The other strange thing is that on my computer the tit pics look no different to the redpoll in terms of oversharpening, they've all been output the same way, all cropped similarly yet the tit pics look oversharpened on Flickr and massively over sharpened on here.
So has there been any press release or info about when we can expect to see D750s back in the country?
I'm a bit worried about repair turn around times and I have some photo sessions coming up!
Are you planning to buy another D750 while you wait for the repair? Hiring will be much more cost effective I guess, unless you are planning to have two bodies.
Thanks, I'll adjust it later.Just had a look at your Flickr link for the Redpoll (DSC 5749) and it seems to be over sharpened, I can see a halo around bird. They may look less due to the different lighting conditions as they were taken in woodland and the BT are on your fence and probably a more open area with light?
Try my settings I listed earlier for the BT / Redpoll and see how it compares. You can then see whats upping the sharpening, you, Flickr or the forum.
Do you shoot JPEG then as RAW files look flat to me and at least need some contrast/curve adjustment, some sharpening and possibly some vibrance/saturation?@snerkler i barely add anything most of the time
100% zoom most of the time as recommended, but at times say with portraits, I go with 50% as minimum.Thanks, I'll adjust it later.
Out of interest, do folk adjust sharpening to what looks best at normal viewing sizes, or what's best at 1:1?
What raw converter do you use? Do you use any screen output sharpening?@snerkler i barely add anything most of the time
Re: sharpening in LR it's interesting to read a lot of your don't use the masking value. I actually have mine set pretty high (80 or even 85 if an image I want to sharpen more), which allows me to take sharpening up to fairly high (40) values for pretty much all photos and as high as 60 for ones I really want to sharpen more (with the higher mask limiting what that affects).
I find that gives me a good edge where you expect an edge, but avoids creating too many artefacts. It doesn't however work with very high noise images...
not sure if any of that's helpful?
What raw converter do you use? Do you use any screen output sharpening?
Do you shoot JPEG then as RAW files look flat to me and at least need some contrast/curve adjustment, some sharpening and possibly some vibrance/saturation?
OK been looking into the redpoll pic, again looks fine on my computer but much sharper on flickr. I've tried reducing sharpness and not adding any screen sharpening on output and it still looks sharper on flickr. I've taken 1:1 screen shots of each and the difference is marked, not sure if it'll show on here.Just had a look at your Flickr link for the Redpoll (DSC 5749) and it seems to be over sharpened, I can see a halo around bird. They may look less due to the different lighting conditions as they were taken in woodland and the BT are on your fence and probably a more open area with light?
Try my settings I listed earlier for the BT / Redpoll and see how it compares. You can then see whats upping the sharpening, you, Flickr or the forum.
OK been looking into the redpoll pic, again looks fine on my computer but much sharper on flickr. I've tried reducing sharpness and not adding any screen sharpening on output and it still looks sharper on flickr. I've taken 1:1 screen shots of each and the difference is marked, not sure if it'll show on here.
Edit: Hmmm, you can see it but only just. Much more noticeable on my computer rather than posted via photobucket. Bloody flickr
the one on the left is showing more detail on my 27 iMac
yes just checked on the pad and yes shows on there tooIt even snowing more details on my iPad
It even snowing more details on my iPad
Have you seen this?Regards the 300mm f4 PF, I do like it a lot, it's pretty much light to carry all day long even with a 1.4TC attached, but for me personally I keep looking for longer reach, I'm guessing a 150-600mm would fit my requirements better though.
Since we discussed sharpening today... an article about just that
https://photographylife.com/advanced-post-processing-tips-three-step-sharpening
Some places not showing D750 stock until 1st August
Wilkinsons, Calumet etc all have them in stock.