Do We Really Need Sharpening?

[Ahmadkawi]

Hello there,

Sharpening is always a step I forget about. At a certain point I started asking myself the question, do I really need to sharpen images? I think; yes and no. Depends on what the photo is for I guess. I suppose that if you're doing something commercial or for people in general, then you have to go by contemporary standards. But I believe that if you're making fine art photography, then maybe sharpening isn't that important. I know, probably on saying that, I've stepped on some toes.

I was watching a video by Lynda on Youtube. The one where they show darkroom techniques like dodging and burning. And the man was saying how in the darkroom, there's no such thing as sharpening, so the focus had to be sharp to begin with. Meanwhile, I was going through Diane Arbus and Sally Mann books. And before that, William Eggleston and Robert Mapplethorpe. And let's face it those people made history shooting film, printed large, and did just fine.

I'm not saying it's film or bust. I shoot on digital, but I'd love to shoot film and develop too. Shoot both and have fun. I'm just saying that, I tend to love things to be organic. I like things to have a certain amount of flaws.

Hmm, usually, I'm a more organized writer but it's been a long day at work and I'm tired. But I really want to put the question out there and get people's feedback and learn.

 

[Ysarex]

Digital images typically need to be sharpened because of the structure of the sensor (gaps between photosites) and that most digital sensors have an anti-aliasing filter installed to resist moire.

Your darkroom techniques info is incorrect: there most certainly was such a thing as sharpening in the darkroom. (Gotta watch that Youtube: largest single collection of misinformation on the planet).

Joe

 

[Ahmadkawi]

Here's the video I talked about.

 

[fjrabon]

Joe hit the nail on the head for all points. Film is inherently sharper because it's an analog conversion of the analog world. The image was basically as sharp as the lens and focus would allow. For digital, sensors and filters that most sensors need to deal with how color gets converted have inherent qualities that make them need sharpening from the raw stage to the JPEG stage.

 

[Ahmadkawi]

Aha, I see. Thanks for that piece of information. It's funny, I tend to read up on technical stuff. But I never came across that comparison. I know that film had a more resolution than digital up till the point where digital cameras caught up. I'm also aware of the anti-aliasing bit, and that now some cameras don't have that filter. But all in all, thanks for the info.

 

[Alexr25]

Your darkroom techniques info is incorrect: there most certainly was such a thing as sharpening in the darkroom. (Gotta watch that Youtube: largest single collection of misinformation on the planet).

The darkroom technique of sharpening an image by sandwiching the negative film with a blurred positive image during printing is where the term "unsharp mask" comes from and it was practices long before photoshop or computers were even dreamt of.

 

[tirediron]

... The image was basically as sharp as the lens and focus would allow...

Subject of course to the grain size of the emulsion.

 

[Ahmadkawi]

[/QUOTE]
The darkroom technique of sharpening an image by sandwiching the negative film with a blurred positive image during printing is where the term "unsharp mask" comes from and it was practices long before photoshop or computers were even dreamt of.[/QUOTE]

Is there any reference for this, I would very much like to check it out. However, and do correct me if I'm mistaken, wouldn't combining two images one of which is blurry, produce the effect that some parts are sharp, but only as an illusion of sharpness?

 

[Ahmadkawi]

The darkroom technique of sharpening an image by sandwiching the negative film with a blurred positive image during printing is where the term "unsharp mask" comes from and it was practices long before photoshop or computers were even dreamt of.

Is there any reference for this, I would very much like to check it out. However, and do correct me if I'm mistaken, wouldn't combining two images one of which is blurry, produce the effect that some parts are sharp, but only as an illusion of sharpness?

 

[Alexr25]

The effect of the unsharp mask is to increase edge contrast which gives the perception of increased sharpness. This by the way is what happens when you sharpen in photoshop, you simply increase edge contrast.
The first links below give a brief explanation of the theory and the second link give a detailed description of how it is done in the darkroom.
Unsharp masking - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Unsharp Masking in the darkroom

 

[fjrabon]

... The image was basically as sharp as the lens and focus would allow...

Subject of course to the grain size of the emulsion.

Sure, hence "basically". In threads like these it's always a question of how far down the rabbit hole you want to go.