JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

There isn't one level of sharpness that will be best for all photos. Different subjects or lighting can have different levels of sharpening that is ideal. That is why it is best not to apply sharpening in camera, or do it at a low level, and then choose the amount of sharpening that looks best in post.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Forgive me for asking but what is an artifact? I always thought it was something dug up an an archaeological site, something old from another time. I have never used it in a photography context unless a pharaoh used a camera 3500 years ago.

Dennis

Psergel Loc: New Mexico

I had a hard time getting used to the use of "artifact" in photography too.

It's usually used to refer to an undesired effect of Post Processing adjustment. When sharpening, if you take things too far you can create a halo effect around certain details of the image creating a very artificial look. (artifact.....artificial)

www.dslreports.com/faq/13197

mcmm Loc: Kansas

Thank you for the information. I was concerned that I was doing something wrong and that I wasn't meeting a standard that would be considered a quality photograph. Personally I liked the photos that I was looking at but like all of you I want them to be WOW photos instead of just good ones. I am learning so much from all of you but have a long way to go!

mcmm Loc: Kansas

I guess I had this idea that it wasn't a good photo unless it was good coming out of the camera before making any adjustments in Photoshop. Am I correct in assuming that a large percentage of photos that I see on this site have had some post processing applied?

Psergel Loc: New Mexico

I can't speak for anyone else but.....100% of my photos get some degree of post processing.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Mcmm, welcome to the Hog, and yes, your assumption is actually correct.
1st, about sharpness. The sharpness that is seen by a normal eye(neutral sharpness), is represented in a Canon camera as a sharpness of 3. Canons default sharpness setting as a camera is delivered to the consumer is 3(neutral). You can of course change that, and if shooting RAW, can be applied after the fact. If you are set to less than 3, you are actually getting a pic that is less sharp than seen by the eye. And 4 or more is adding sharpness(contrast) that is beyond what is neutral. keep in mind that a pic can not be made sharper than how it was taken. The process is only creating a higher contrast, along contrasting lines, to make the areas appear mor pronounced giving the appearance of sharpness. There is no substituted for good technique, including sharpness. A very fine line will quickly pixelate with even moderate sharpening and be obvious to a trained eye.
If you're set at 3(neutral), and the pic is taken sharp, then NO additional sharpening in post would be necessary.
The reason all RAW pics need some PP, is that in RAW, the file does not represent what the eye actually saw, and we want to get it to that neutrality that our eye had actually seen as a starting point. It is just the nature of the beast we call RAW! And we are of course free to go as far beyond that as we wish, which is where all of the controversy comes in.
The problem is that many try to take a crappy pic, and think that if they PP the beejeebies out of it, that somehow they made it better. But it's still the same crappy pic, masquerading as some kind of art.
There are great shots that can benifit from removing a piece of trash, or increasing a highlight, raising a black hole to pull some detail etc. but you have only improved small details, not overhauled the composition.
Your question was about sharpening, I hope that helped. ;-)
SS

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

There is no need to be concerned, the sharpness is set in the camera before the shoot, and DPP is just reading the meta data (which sharpness setting was used), that's all.
Although I have to say, a setting of 5 seems very excessive!

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Most serious photographers shoot in RAW, so no processing is applied in the camera, and the images must be post processed to some degree when they are opened, and usually some additional post processing later. Sharpening in particular is usually one of the last things done, and depends on the size of the file and its intended use (printing or on-screen use).

mcmm Loc: Kansas

You have all been so helpful. I will go back and set my camera to neutral and work with that for a while and see if I feel I need to make adjustments.
So much to learn!!!!

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Welcome to the Hog, mcmm.
Keep in mind that it's easy to over sharpen in PP. My photo teacher said he was a judge for a photo contest, and said "more than 50% were over sharpened!" He said you have to increase the size to 200%, or more, to get a better look at what you're doing.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Thanks for the very informative reply.

OonlyBonly

The sharpness and a few other settings there are controlled by the "type" of photo to which the camera is set. Portrait, Landscape, Standard, Neutral, etc. all have different combinations of settings. You can change those settings easily to fit what any particular photo may require.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Marion, you are quite welcome. ;-)
SS

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Marion, I hate to say it, but 50% is probably low! :lol:
But DO keep in mind that when viewing at 100%, you are viewing at one pixel on the digi file to one pixel on you monitor, so there is no distortion, that's why we usually use 100%. At 200%, your monitor has to start interpolating, thus inherently introducing at least some distortion to what you are viewing.
Just saying. ;-)
SS