Oojiflip - Sharpening & Prescreening

[Oojiflip]

Hi there,
I have quite a few successful uploads on JP currently but I still have little to no idea what constitutes a "sharp" image, especially at resolutions as low as 1280p. A lot of my rejections are for "soft" and I simply don't know the best way to remedy this as I have tried several different sharpening methods in photoshop to no real avail. The shots I'm taking are razor sharp and perfectly worthy of JP, it's simply that I need help with the sharpening and downsampling steps, and would gladly accept some tips.
Thanks,
Taylor

[dlowwa]

Hi there,
I have quite a few successful uploads on JP currently but I still have little to no idea what constitutes a "sharp" image, especially at resolutions as low as 1280p. A lot of my rejections are for "soft" and I simply don't know the best way to remedy this as I have tried several different sharpening methods in photoshop to no real avail. The shots I'm taking are razor sharp and perfectly worthy of JP, it's simply that I need help with the sharpening and downsampling steps, and would gladly accept some tips.
Thanks,
Taylor

Can you post an example of a 'razor sharp' shot?

[Oojiflip]

Can you post an example of a 'razor sharp' shot?

I mean something like this, the "Regional" text on the Aer Lingus is perfectly sharp and the reg on the BA is crystal clear.

[dlowwa]

I mean something like this, the "Regional" text on the Aer Lingus is perfectly sharp and the reg on the BA is crystal clear.

Not sure I would qualify those as 'razor sharp', but the quality should be there to get decent edits at least at 1280, if not 1600. Given that, seems like you just need to work on your sharpening. I do my sharpening before re-sizing, and I never submit anything that is less than a 50% down-size (i.e. for a 1600pix image, the original should be at least 3200pix+). Depending on the sharpness of the original I'll usually do a single pass of USM @50% 0.5-1.0pix.

[Oojiflip]

Not sure I would qualify those as 'razor sharp', but the quality should be there to get decent edits at least at 1280, if not 1600. Given that, seems like you just need to work on your sharpening. I do my sharpening before re-sizing, and I never submit anything that is less than a 50% down-size (i.e. for a 1600pix image, the original should be at least 3200pix+). Depending on the sharpness of the original I'll usually do a single pass of USM @50% 0.5-1.0pix.

Thank you very much, I'll try that for a bit as I usually sharpen after downscaling!

[thepiecesfit]

Not sure I would qualify those as 'razor sharp'

Hi dlowwa, do you have any examples of "razor sharp" images, so that we have something to aim for?

anyways, I've been suffering from the same issue as OP, so thanks for the advice!

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa, do you have any examples of "razor sharp" images, so that we have something to aim for?

anyways, I've been suffering from the same issue as OP, so thanks for the advice!

Honestly, unless you're looking at something from the same angle/distance/light/etc.. it's really hard to compare images directly. I'd consider most of my own images 'sharp enough' but few of them would be 'razor' sharp. Best I can do is a similarly-sized crop of one of my most recently accepted.

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10886542

Compared side-to-side with one of the OP's images:



Not a huge difference to be fair, but you may notice mine is a bit sharper in areas like the windows, nose gear, etc. That said, this image in particular of mine I would consider no better than 'sharp enough' as it's not quite perfect, but it's certainly good enough to be accepted here.

On the other hand, while nothing near a direct comparable, this one I would consider one of my sharper images, especially given the conditions

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8368412

Close crop:



Again, I would consider even my own images 'perfectly sharp' maybe only 10% of the time, so there's always something to aim for, keeping in mind in most cases 'sharp enough' should be fine for images to be accepted here.

[Oojiflip]

Honestly, unless you're looking at something from the same angle/distance/light/etc.. it's really hard to compare images directly. I'd consider most of my own images 'sharp enough' but few of them would be 'razor' sharp. Best I can do is a similarly-sized crop of one of my most recently accepted.

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10886542

Compared side-to-side with one of the OP's images:



Not a huge difference to be fair, but you may notice mine is a bit sharper in areas like the windows, nose gear, etc. That said, this image in particular of mine I would consider no better than 'sharp enough' as it's not quite perfect, but it's certainly good enough to be accepted here.

On the other hand, while nothing near a direct comparable, this one I would consider one of my sharper images, especially given the conditions

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8368412

Close crop:



Again, I would consider even my own images 'perfectly sharp' maybe only 10% of the time, so there's always something to aim for, keeping in mind in most cases 'sharp enough' should be fine for images to be accepted here.

I guess I'm just being limited by my gear at this point. Those shots I posted are about as sharp as any of my pics get so to me that's razor sharp, but those examples you've posted are much much cleaner, and the fine details are like a single pixel across.

[LewisW295]

I guess I'm just being limited by my gear at this point. Those shots I posted are about as sharp as any of my pics get so to me that's razor sharp, but those examples you've posted are much much cleaner, and the fine details are like a single pixel across.

.... Well if it's any consolation, they're better than my usual output! What gear are you using bud? And camera settings if you're willing to share....

[dlowwa]

I guess I'm just being limited by my gear at this point. Those shots I posted are about as sharp as any of my pics get so to me that's razor sharp, but those examples you've posted are much much cleaner, and the fine details are like a single pixel across.

Gear and technique. The Finnair was taken with my cheap(er) 70-300mm travel lens, but still managed to yield a pretty decent result. The F-15 was taken with higher-end glass, sure, but you still need to know how to get the most out of it.

[Oojiflip]

.... Well if it's any consolation, they're better than my usual output! What gear are you using bud? And camera settings if you're willing to share....

Canon EOS 80D + Sigma 150-600C, settings, well... They're never the same at 2 different locations!

[Oojiflip]

I've just started using Lightroom and have realized that the export options in that allow me to just downscale the image as I export it and for some reason it seems to retain much more detail and keep the resulting image very sharp. I have also found out that there was a direct export option straight out of camera raw in photoshop which does exactly the same thing. Here are a couple of shots using the new method which I find much simpler yet yields better results.

[dlowwa]

I've just started using Lightroom and have realized that the export options in that allow me to just downscale the image as I export it and for some reason it seems to retain much more detail and keep the resulting image very sharp. I have also found out that there was a direct export option straight out of camera raw in photoshop which does exactly the same thing. Here are a couple of shots using the new method which I find much simpler yet yields better results.

1. borderline soft
2. ok for me

[LewisW295]

Canon EOS 80D + Sigma 150-600C, settings, well... They're never the same at 2 different locations!

I'm shooting on the 150-600 and don't get sharpness anywhere near this! Must be a skill issue on my end

[Oojiflip]

I'm shooting on the 150-600 and don't get sharpness anywhere near this! Must be a skill issue on my end

Could be a number of things. Body (most likely), bad autofocus settings in camera, using the full 600mm (lens sharp to around 350-400mm), also editing correctly makes a big difference.