🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/3LqnCuJ 🎁

sharpening for portraits?


I am the Lord thy Mod
Staff member
Supporting Member
Jun 7, 2012
Reaction score
Central Florida
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
example for my questions...

DSC_1503 by pixmedic, on Flickr

sharpening for portraits...
too much? not enough?
I tend to prefer slightly soft instead of over-sharpened for people shots.
what about selective sharpening, like just the eyes? I have adobe CC but mostly use lightroom.
is the adjustment brush as a circle the best way to get just the eyes?
clarity slider -vs- sharpening? differences? any advantages/disadvantages?

I usually don't do much in the way of sharpening outside of LR's default "25" when you load up a raw file, but ive seen it brought up a few times recently and thought I would get a quick forum checkup on my sharpening techniques.
I apply so much sharpening, the photo turns into a block of black and white.
I rarely do any; I have LR set to '0', and will sometimes nudge it to 5 or 10 but not often. I too much prefer a hint of softness. I really dislike over-sharpened eyes.I wouldn't make anyt changes to your example image.
I'm no expert here. i generally add a little overall sharpening to boys and men (not babies or toddlers) above the default 25 in lightroom, maybe up to 35/40, depending on iso, whether I used flash or not and the general look of the photo.

For woman I find that if I leave the default to 25, but put the clarity to minus 10, and then sharpen the eyes to what they were without the clarity in minus, it generally looks good and slightly softens the skin, but not overly. Pretty much i do the same for babies
do you want comments on this picture?

i used this picture as an example of the sharpening i usually do on a portrait.
if the comment is pertinent to my question of sharpening or the clarity slider then yes, by all means.
im not looking for general C&C, as the picture is already where I want it to be.
I think the sharpening looks good on this. Personally, I'd go a little sharper, but that's me.
Braineack said:

Really first rate for this type of shot. Looks pretty good seen on-screen. I would add more sharpening if sending that to inkjet printing....on-screen on my 30 inch cinema display, an image sent to inkjet needs to look almost "crunchy"...meaning a very high pixel radius, like 1.1 pixel radius at 80 to 100 percent; so,so much USM that it looks like crap seen on-screen. Again, "crunchy", and with the blacks set about 15 or so, so it does not ink-down too much and just crush all the low tones into one solid mass of indistinguishable dark tones.

Most reactions

New Topics