Why sharpen your images?

Posted by Haje Jan Kamps

This week, I received a rather good question from one of my old friends, Cindy. She was wondering “how come that whenever I’m taking digital images, I have to sharpen them afterwards?” Good question, and of course, it’s already one step ahead of the curve, in that the question presupposes that yes, you DO have to sharpen your images. Which is correct… But why?

Back in the days of film, things were simple: If you wanted your photos, you got prints made. These prints were predictable: They’ll be on paper, have a certain dynamic range, etc. Then digital photography came along and turned everything on its head, because suddenly there are so many more things you can do with your photos…

You can project them on a wall (in a series of different resolutions, depending on the projector), you can upload them to a website, you can have prints made, or you can print them in magazines in newspapers. This is where part of the problem comes from…

Mathematically, (which is, of course, how computers think), it is far easier to sharpen an image than to un-sharpen it - It’s important to remember, for example, that un-sharpening an image is not the same as merely blurring it: The quality of the resulting fuzziness is completely different.

Camera manufacturers know this, and this is where one of the biggest differences between the way images are processed inside an SLR and a digital compact are different:

Digital SLR versus compact cameras

The manufacturers assume (correctly, most of the time), that people shooting with compact cameras don’t plan to do much to their photos after they are downloaded onto their computer. So, how do you make the photos look as good as possible? By sharpening them in-camera, so they look gorgeous right away. You take one look at ‘em, are happy, and upload them to Flickr right away.

All good and well, but people photographing with an SLR camera are different. For one thing, they’ve paid a lot of extra money for the flexibility and choice that is inherent in a SLR: You can choose lenses, shutter times, ISO values, and all that wonderfulness. It is therefore safe to assume that an SLR user wants more control over the final image, and for this reason, photos coming out of a digital SLR are generally sharpened less - in some cases, you will even see that photos coming out of a digital compact appear sharper (and therefore better) than that from an SLR.

$ earned from this advert will be invested in beer

Quirks of sharpening

As already has been mentioned, it’s easier to sharpen than to de-sharpen an image. There is a second quirk too, however: It’s never a good idea to re-sharpen an image (i.e. sharpen a photo that has already been sharpened). This is the crux of why you can ultimately get better photos out of a SLR: you evaluate the photograph, and experiment with the amount of sharpening you do. Then, once the preview looks good, you run the sharpening on the photograph, and then never sharpen it again.

Photos from most digital compacts have, of course, already been sharpened once (inside the camera), so if you try and re-sharpen them to get more clarity out of them, you’ll never get the same level of woah-factor, because you’ll start getting sharpening artifacts (thin white lines around the areas that have been sharpened): What, in fact, happens is that the software isn’t sharpening the image itself, it’ll start sharpening the parts of the image which has already been sharpened. Sometimes this can lead to interesting effects, but often you just lose any subtlety to an image.

It’s also worth noting that sharpening often amplifies the downside of JPG image compression: If your photograph has been compressed too much (such as when you shoot on ‘medium’ quality on your camera, rather than ’superfine’, or whatever the highest quality setting is), you might find that suddenly you’ll get a lot of ugly banding and compression artifacts showing up that were practically invisible before.

So, in-camera sharpening is bad?

Hmm. Not necessarily: I never really do all that much editing on casual holiday snaps, for example, so I leave my Canon IXUS compact camera set to ‘high sharpening’. It means I can upload my photos straight to Facebook, and they’ll look pretty decent.

When it comes to artistic control, however: Yes, in-camera sharpening is bad. There are two ways around this: Turn the sharpening down as much as you can in your camera (your photos will look a lot worse when you look at them the first time, but when you sharpen them on your computer, they’ll really zing), or shoot in RAW format (which, if you want full creative control, you should be doing anyway, but that’s for a different article).

So, how do I sharpen my images?

Hah, that’s a completely different article altogether. Luckily, I’ve already written that one - head over to Sharpen those photos: Unsharp Mask for more info than you ever wanted about this topic!

Did you like this post? Stay in touch!

If you liked this post, why not stay in touch with Photocritic going forward?

I'm on Flickr and Twitter, or you could add my RSS feed to your favourite feed reader. Or, if you don't fancy doing any of that, drop us a comment below; you can be anonymous if you want to, but if you add a link to your blog or similar, I'll promise I'll come have a look!

Money made from this advert will be invested in beer.

Insights, suggestions and comments

By Eoin on April 10th, 2008 (permalink)

Hmm, good points, I hadn’t thought about it that way before about my DSLR.

By Peter on April 10th, 2008 (permalink)

Yeah same here. Thanks for the article!

By Apurva on April 10th, 2008 (permalink)

Great article. Informative and very useful. Thanks!
Apurva

By Matt on April 12th, 2008 (permalink)

Camera manufacturers put a filter over the sensor of digital cameras to control unwanted optical surprises. Forgive me if I can’t think of what the filter is called and what it controls.

A negative side effect of this filter is images that come out of the camera are a little soft. Therefore they need to be sharpened a bit.

A good tip for sharpening is, if you have adobe photoshop cs3, to turn the layer to be sharpened into a smart layer. That way you can use you sharpening method of choice and adjust the sharpening amount when you need to for output to a different resolution or device. This is non destructive and similar to an adjustment layer.

Cheers

By Paw on June 8th, 2009 (permalink)

Nice article - Well written and very informative.

Thanks man.

Trackbacks

 

Share your wisdom



Current Poll

By the end of the month, will you own an iPhone?
View Results

My recent Flickr favourites

©ashley suzanne taylorWalt Disney Concert Hall 2Caressed by the Sun IIIPale LifeBorage flower"Between the lights and the shadows, a woman sits"End of Day (II)Midsummer!Hair Trim (87/365)Rocas ValleThe Netherlands, insidePaint the town Pink.Have a good day!DSC_4102Bending The Laws of Gravityzot does not like to be woken. zot will kill you with her eyes. And then, maybe, she can get some peace and quiet.
See all my Flickr favourites here

My recent Flickr uploads

near Swingate, ENG, United KingdomWarmenhuizen, North Holland, NetherlandsKorrewegwijk, Groningen, Netherlandsnear Ladegårdshuse, Roskilde, Denmarknear Hornstrup, Vejle, DenmarkVejleHolmenkollen, Oslo, NorwayRogaland reflected in an Arai
See my Flickr galleries here

Photocritic on Twitter...

  • Jul 3 tweet: http://bit.ly/v7PfR was nominated to become a Twitter tee - feel free to vote it down if you think it's lame! :) (link)
  • Jul 2 tweet: "We shot 50,000 pix, printed 8,000 of them and shot another 1,800 pictures" - http://is.gd/1lTrX (YouTube video / stop motion animation) (link)
  • Jul 2 tweet: I failed to notice that I now have over 3,000 followers! I'll do my best not to disappoint, stay tuned for Photocritic updates soon. (link)
  • Jul 2 tweet: The Human Printer 'prints' photographs in CMYK using felt-tip markers. Bonkers, but very cool: http://is.gd/1li3D (link)
  • Jul 2 tweet: I love abstract buildings, strong colours and great lighting, this has it all: http://is.gd/1lh9a (link)
  • Jul 1 tweet: This dude wrote a profile of me which makes me sound like a rock star: http://is.gd/1kK0Y Awesome stuff. (link)
  • follow @photocritic on Twitter!

My book

macrocover.jpg
... is now available from »Amazon.com and »Amazon.co.uk, too!

About

This site is all about learning more about photography, from the incredibly insightful (rarely) to the dreadfully mundane (also, hopefully rarely) via just about everything in between.

If this website seems a little whimsical and random, then that's because the author of this blog, who for the occasion is confusing himself by writing about himself in the third person, is slightly whimsical and random himself.

Enjoy!

- Haje