Output sharpening in Lightroom?

ChrisFL

What are your thoughts on using it for printing?

pathfinder

Anything that I do not print via Smugmug, I do print via Lightroom( 4 now ) exclusively, and yes, I do use the output sharpening built into Lightroom 4's print module for images destined for my own inkjet printer.

If I know the file is destined for printing online via one of Smugmug's partners, I do not do output sharpening before uploading, as I am comfortable letting them do the output sharpening.

arodney

Output sharpening in LR works great. It ‘knows’ the size of the print cell and based on the resolution (which you can alter), it sharpens appropriately. Keep in mind however, the output sharpening here is based on going to an Ink Jet printer! In Web and Slideshow, it is based of course on output to a display.

digital paradise

Hello Andrew. You helped me out quite a bit at DPreview regarding colour management. That was many years ago. I purchased your book Colour Management for Photographers and still tell people what you suggest when people ask if they should work in sRGB or aRGB. I was a real Canon's DPP hardliner as my main converter and then PS for final PP and output. I tried LR a few years ago but it turned me off simply because I had no visual reference at output sharpening. Just because of the workflow and features I recently decided get LR. For personal use I still use DPP or ACR because I'm working 1 to 6 images per session. For mass edits you can't beat LR.

I have been scouring the web and came across this site. I'm OK at the sharpening part while working in LR which I consider the capture sharpening phase. Not so sure about output sharpening at export. For print I still export at full size with no sharpening and run an action in PS to do this. For web images which range from 800 to 1200 on the long side I find that Screen @ High seems OK so I adopted that.

As odd as it may sound I basically quit printing a few years back. I give clients a CD and they look after that. I really prefer web work. Anyway I would like to speed up my workflow by avoiding PS. There is matte or glossy - high, standard and low? What do I do here? I normally resize the files for an 11 by 14 just incase print but I think most people print 8 by 10 for event photos.

Thanks in advance.

digital paradise

Just to add there is tons of info for the actual sharpening and sharpening using the print module out there but very little on output sharpening at export.

arodney

Output sharpening in Export is the same as print (Matt or Glossy), optimized for ink jet. You also have the option for output sharpening for screen (as you have in Web). All are based on the actual size, output resolution of the image you are exporting and using any capture sharpening you apply in Develop.

digital paradise

Thanks for responding. I remember reading that when LR it is not recommended to resize after output. Any suggestions to which setting is the best setting between Low, Standard and High. I guess that is a difficult question to answer since every situation is unique. I like sharp images but concerned about halos, etc at the high setting. That is the issue - no real definition of what those three settings do.

I guess the best thing for me to do is process an image, resize, set the PPI accordingly, act and output 3 images - one at each sharpening setting. Take them to a local lab and get them printed.

arodney

digital paradise wrote: »

I remember reading that when LR it is not recommended to resize after output.

Why would you when it can do that for you. Now if you want to export a full resolution version, work with it in Photoshop and then make iterations of different sizes, that’s fine but output sharpening is now out of the LR workflow. You have to do that for each iteration sized for it’s intended output.

Low/Standard/High are not big differences, mostly a season to taste. The sharpening is based on PhotoKit Sharpener. Using Standard. During early beta when this was implemented into LR, one well know tester preferred slightly less, another slightly more sharpening that the PK default (which is a layer with opacity that the user can set as well to an even finer degree). The LR team decided to make three strengths. They should be pretty subtle differences.

I guess the best thing for me to do is process an image, resize, set the PPI accordingly, act and output 3 images - one at each sharpening setting. Take them to a local lab and get them printed.

Yup.

digital paradise

Explaining the changes are subtle really helps a lot. Again there is not much information out there when you do a general search so again I appreciate your help.

digital paradise

I created 3 files and you were correct (not that I doubted). Very subtle on the screen. High starts to make skin look less smooth but the print will always look different.

arodney

digital paradise wrote: »

I created 3 files and you were correct (not that I doubted). Very subtle on the screen. High starts to make skin look less smooth but the print will always look different.

But that might be a better setting for a high frequency image (skin is low frequency, Standard is probably better). That is, if you want to batch image types to the three options. Otherwise, Standard seems to be pretty good overall.

digital paradise

I managed to get that done today. All three prints looked very good and the changes were subtle. Standard looked best.