Sharpness
Oct 4, 2017 08:29:30 #
dpullum has made me aware that 4K monitors and associated video cards produce different results than the lower resolution hardware. I have seen this on my second computer which runs at 1920 res and needed to reduce the sharpness to approximate the 4K view.
Here is an image processed on my 4K monitor and Radeon Card which I think is sharp. Now I'm wondering what you see.
Sharp?
Not Sharp?
Over Sharpened?
Please let me know.
Here is an image processed on my 4K monitor and Radeon Card which I think is sharp. Now I'm wondering what you see.
Sharp?
Not Sharp?
Over Sharpened?
Please let me know.
Oct 4, 2017 08:45:30 #
Hi Joe,
I don't know about the monitor but your picture looks great on download. Take care & ...
I don't know about the monitor but your picture looks great on download. Take care & ...
Oct 4, 2017 09:03:04 #
Oct 4, 2017 09:14:03 #
Oct 4, 2017 09:14:15 #
Nalu wrote:
Sharp, on the verge of over sharpened IMO.
I would agree with this assessment. My monitor is 1920x1080.
Oct 4, 2017 09:14:40 #
SSam
Loc: Sierra Vista, AZ
joer wrote:
I have seen this on my second computer which runs at 1920 res and needed to reduce the sharpness to approximate the 4K view.
I recently purchased a 4k system and want to "upgrade" my 76 year old brain. Your statement seems to be "backwards". 4k has over twice the pixel count as 1920 x 1080. Why did you say that you needed to REDUCE the sharpness to see it on "the 4K view?
I keep my 4k machine off the internet so I couldn't 'test' how it looked on it. Sure looked good on download to my Amazon Fire tablet though!
Oct 4, 2017 09:24:31 #
What I see is exquisite--sharp but not overdone.
Is there a solution to the problem that digital pictures are seen on many different screens with different effects? A paper print is what it is, and although the lighting and positioning of it have an effect, once you get what you want, it is pretty much the same for all to see. I suspect that a digital image edited on modest hardware and software should look the same on higher resolution screens? Color rendition will always depend on the calibration of the hardware used. Every TV has controls to adjust the image as the viewer wants it "edited."
I wonder why the bee is so sharp and the flower is not--even in the plane of the bee?
Is there a solution to the problem that digital pictures are seen on many different screens with different effects? A paper print is what it is, and although the lighting and positioning of it have an effect, once you get what you want, it is pretty much the same for all to see. I suspect that a digital image edited on modest hardware and software should look the same on higher resolution screens? Color rendition will always depend on the calibration of the hardware used. Every TV has controls to adjust the image as the viewer wants it "edited."
I wonder why the bee is so sharp and the flower is not--even in the plane of the bee?
Oct 4, 2017 09:25:55 #
Shallow depth of field - the bee is very sharp in that individual hairs and pollen are sharp. The flowers are not sharp just an inch or so in front of bee.
This laptop screen is 1366 X 768.
These old eyes barely see in 2K, what do I do with 4K???
This laptop screen is 1366 X 768.
These old eyes barely see in 2K, what do I do with 4K???
Oct 4, 2017 09:30:55 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
joer wrote:
dpullum has made me aware that 4K monitors and associated video cards produce different results than the lower resolution hardware. I have seen this on my second computer which runs at 1920 res and needed to reduce the sharpness to approximate the 4K view.
Here is an image processed on my 4K monitor and Radeon Card which I think is sharp. Now I'm wondering what you see.
Sharp?
Not Sharp?
Over Sharpened?
Please let me know.
Here is an image processed on my 4K monitor and Radeon Card which I think is sharp. Now I'm wondering what you see.
Sharp?
Not Sharp?
Over Sharpened?
Please let me know.
Excellent on download. You can count the stripes on the bee. And that fuzzy white hair really stands out. Great photo. I assume people buy expensive lenses for sharpness+.
Oct 4, 2017 09:38:44 #
Nalu wrote:
Sharp, on the verge of over sharpened IMO.
I'm of the same opinion. To my eyes, you're using sharpening to compensate for a bit of subject movement and soft focus on the bee's eyes. Look at the bee's legs / pollen sack and the wing above the same position. These appear better focused than the near eye of the bee. My EXIF extracter can tell me 1/250 f/14 ISO-125, but not the location of the focus point. In this light I'd suggest doubling the speed to 1/500 and the ISO as needed. The most important issue is to assure a single focus-point is set directly on the eye. Everything else about the image is perfect: the colors & saturation, noise, depth of field, and placement of the subject in the frame.
Oct 4, 2017 12:44:42 #
Al Beatty wrote:
Hi Joe,
I don't know about the monitor but your picture looks great on download. Take care & ...
I don't know about the monitor but your picture looks great on download. Take care & ...
Thanks Al.
Oct 4, 2017 12:45:25 #
Nalu wrote:
Sharp, on the verge of over sharpened IMO.
I thank you for the reply.
Oct 4, 2017 12:46:16 #
lsimpkins wrote:
I would agree with this assessment. My monitor is 1920x1080.
Thank you for responding.
Oct 4, 2017 12:50:52 #
Oct 4, 2017 12:54:48 #
Charles 46277 wrote:
What I see is exquisite--sharp but not overdone. b... (show quote)
I used a mask for sharpening in LR.
Thanks for the comments.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.