Joran
Member
I'm scanning my 35mm negatives using a Plustek scannen and Vue Scan at 3800dpi with Unsharp mask off. I follow Christopher Crawfords method. I edit my scans in Adobe Lightroom. I apply sharpening in lightroom as follows:
Amount: 100
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 25
This results in really visible grain (example). And then there is output sharpening while exporting te image. This results in even more grain. So much I hardly see any difference in Tri-X shot at 400 of 1600. What is a good starting point for sharpening film scans in Lightroom if you want to maintain the film characteristics (grain)? Is it better to do to less sharpening in Lightroom as your doing extra output sharping on Export?
Amount: 100
Radius: 1.0
Detail: 25
This results in really visible grain (example). And then there is output sharpening while exporting te image. This results in even more grain. So much I hardly see any difference in Tri-X shot at 400 of 1600. What is a good starting point for sharpening film scans in Lightroom if you want to maintain the film characteristics (grain)? Is it better to do to less sharpening in Lightroom as your doing extra output sharping on Export?
valdas
Veteran
I don't do extra output sharpening during Export, only in LR "Develop" after resizing (when I use it for web only). I use radius between 0.8-1.0 (depending on film) and Detail between 25-30 trying to fine-tune each time...
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I don't do any sharpening of the fullsize scans. I've found that with my Nikon scanner, sharpening just increases grain without increasing detail (unlike digital camera files, which should be sharpened in Lightroom when processing the RAW file).
I just sharpen my film scans when I am ready to print. Output sharpening after resizing to the final print size.
The sharpen setting you're using are kind of high, even if you were using them for a digital camera image. I generally sharpen my Canon 5DmkII files shot at the base ISO of 100 with Amount 50, radius .7, and detail 40. That gives a less harsh sharpening that retains fine detail in my Canon's files, compared to using the settings you're using. That said, those are for digital cameras, do not do any capture sharpening of your film scans.
I just sharpen my film scans when I am ready to print. Output sharpening after resizing to the final print size.
The sharpen setting you're using are kind of high, even if you were using them for a digital camera image. I generally sharpen my Canon 5DmkII files shot at the base ISO of 100 with Amount 50, radius .7, and detail 40. That gives a less harsh sharpening that retains fine detail in my Canon's files, compared to using the settings you're using. That said, those are for digital cameras, do not do any capture sharpening of your film scans.
cz23
-
I've lately been scanning a lot of old negatives for a project, using the same hardware and software as you, Joran. I zoom to 1:2, which is said to approximate how sharpening will render in print, and then sharpen to taste. It's usually very little or none at all. 100/1.00 seems extreme to me and would certainly accentuate grain.
If you're sharpening for only web display, why not just scale to your display size and sharpen to whatever looks good?
John
If you're sharpening for only web display, why not just scale to your display size and sharpen to whatever looks good?
John
Joran
Member
Thanks for the reply's.
@Christopher Crawford I did some tests with the amount of sharpening. With sharpening off the images where a bit soft for my taste. Maybe your Nikon scanner is a bit sharper than my Plustek?
I've now set sharpening to 25 - 1,0 - 25 and disabled output sharpening. I guess I will only use that when sending files to be printed.
@johnwolf Good idea. When resizing images for web use, I can always sharpen the JPEGs a bit more in Photoshop.
@Christopher Crawford I did some tests with the amount of sharpening. With sharpening off the images where a bit soft for my taste. Maybe your Nikon scanner is a bit sharper than my Plustek?
I've now set sharpening to 25 - 1,0 - 25 and disabled output sharpening. I guess I will only use that when sending files to be printed.
@johnwolf Good idea. When resizing images for web use, I can always sharpen the JPEGs a bit more in Photoshop.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Fist, sharpening has nothing to do with film grain.
Second, film grain is not something special on darkroom print. Only if it is Foma 400 in Coffeenol.
Why it has to be special for scans?
If you want to get grainy pictures on computer screen by LR manipulations increase clarity and work on exposure settings.
Second, film grain is not something special on darkroom print. Only if it is Foma 400 in Coffeenol.
Why it has to be special for scans?If you want to get grainy pictures on computer screen by LR manipulations increase clarity and work on exposure settings.
charjohncarter
Veteran
It is for sure a personal choice: how much or how little sharpening. I'm a softy so either right off or on the way out I don't like very much. My Sharpening is 70-2.0-2 with the PS numbers; if at all. This is for film.
Pioneer
Veteran
As John and others here say, sharpen to your taste.
I scan a lot of film and do not sharpen on capture. After making all my adjustments and sizing for print will I sharpen, and then only what I think works for the print I am making.
Another thing you may want to try is to tone down your scan capture from 3800 dpi to 2400 dpi. You may be introducing some digital noise at 3800 dpi and mistaking it for grain. I scan at 2400 and then use Photoshop to resize my image later if I need.
Please keep in mind that I am a long way from being a scanning expert. There are certainly others here who are far more experienced with this than I am. What I have recommended are things that I feel have helped me and your own mileage may vary.
I scan a lot of film and do not sharpen on capture. After making all my adjustments and sizing for print will I sharpen, and then only what I think works for the print I am making.
Another thing you may want to try is to tone down your scan capture from 3800 dpi to 2400 dpi. You may be introducing some digital noise at 3800 dpi and mistaking it for grain. I scan at 2400 and then use Photoshop to resize my image later if I need.
Please keep in mind that I am a long way from being a scanning expert. There are certainly others here who are far more experienced with this than I am. What I have recommended are things that I feel have helped me and your own mileage may vary.
Joran
Member
Well it emphasizes the grain, making it more harsh/salt and pepper like.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Sharpening is an interesting challenge nad there are lots of 'gurus', who are happy to help.
One of the photo mags in the U.K. This week is suggesting meeting capture sharpening settings between 80 and 130 in LR for amount on digital files. I have never used this much as I hate the crunchy hyper real look, but that has become normalized now.
When I had my 9000 I used to use a very light capture sharpen to make grain (or aliasing) clear, but avoided emphasizing it. Usually a low radius low amount and with standard detail and a low mask. My aim was a clean looking file, not a super sharp file. Using this approach I've made prints that I like at 30" x 20" from 35mm hp5
My general rule is to keep sharpening as low as possible and accept that starting points vary by camera/scanner/film. By way of comparison with Chris, my current digital sharpening startpoint (Pentax K1) is amount 40, radius 1, detail 50, masking 25.
Mike
One of the photo mags in the U.K. This week is suggesting meeting capture sharpening settings between 80 and 130 in LR for amount on digital files. I have never used this much as I hate the crunchy hyper real look, but that has become normalized now.
When I had my 9000 I used to use a very light capture sharpen to make grain (or aliasing) clear, but avoided emphasizing it. Usually a low radius low amount and with standard detail and a low mask. My aim was a clean looking file, not a super sharp file. Using this approach I've made prints that I like at 30" x 20" from 35mm hp5
My general rule is to keep sharpening as low as possible and accept that starting points vary by camera/scanner/film. By way of comparison with Chris, my current digital sharpening startpoint (Pentax K1) is amount 40, radius 1, detail 50, masking 25.
Mike
yanchep_mike
Always Trying
In my opinion sharpening is a personal thing, i do not sharpen when scanning and only sharpen very rarely and sparingly on export, i like it that way. Maybe that's the reason others don't like my pics(smile).
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
Just a note that Tri-X pushed two stops like in the photo you linked to will have much stronger grain, so that is to be expected. But to be quite honest I don't think it is 'offensive' in the photo, in the sense that it disturbs. And note that the barcode is almost visible so the push and resulting increased grain notwithstanding there's plenty of detail in your photograph. How much you should sharpen to "maintain the film characteristics" is fundamentally a question of preference.
In my case I edit my scans in Adobe Camera Raw and do my first sharpening there. How much will depend on the photo in question and, in particular, the film used and how it was exposed. For some films, usually fine-grained b&w, slides and really well-exposed C41, I can usually use a very high Amount without the image degrading visibly. Usually, however, I don't want to do that because the image may take on an unnatural look. For most photos I use a lower Amount setting than 100.
For the first sharpening Radius is rarely outside the 0,7-1,2 span. The impact of Radius also depends on the photo in question so it's difficult to be specific. It's a trial and error thing. I never touch Detail actually.
I will do a second round of sharpening if I decide to print an image, but the above is my standard procedure for the edit of the 'original' TIFF file.
Incidentally, a cool thing with USM or ACR's sharpening (I suspect it would be the same in Lightroom) is that if you 'inverse' the Amount and Radius settings - for instance 10-12 Amount and upwards 80-100 in Radius - edges get enhanced in a pretty cool way. It's a bit like the Clarity slider but not exactly.
br
Philip
In my case I edit my scans in Adobe Camera Raw and do my first sharpening there. How much will depend on the photo in question and, in particular, the film used and how it was exposed. For some films, usually fine-grained b&w, slides and really well-exposed C41, I can usually use a very high Amount without the image degrading visibly. Usually, however, I don't want to do that because the image may take on an unnatural look. For most photos I use a lower Amount setting than 100.
For the first sharpening Radius is rarely outside the 0,7-1,2 span. The impact of Radius also depends on the photo in question so it's difficult to be specific. It's a trial and error thing. I never touch Detail actually.
I will do a second round of sharpening if I decide to print an image, but the above is my standard procedure for the edit of the 'original' TIFF file.
Incidentally, a cool thing with USM or ACR's sharpening (I suspect it would be the same in Lightroom) is that if you 'inverse' the Amount and Radius settings - for instance 10-12 Amount and upwards 80-100 in Radius - edges get enhanced in a pretty cool way. It's a bit like the Clarity slider but not exactly.
br
Philip
I've always preferred to use a high pass filter. I don't use sharpening when scanning. One thing that is a pet hate of mine is digital noise. I've never been happy with my sharpening results using unsharp mask, whereas a high pass sharpens without producing the sort of artifacts I dislike. But my Photoshop skills are very elementary, so my own experiences and results are likely a reflection on my own lack of expertise, more than any shortcomings with the software.