Check my workflow... what to change?

[Tom Cudzilo]

I think I need help when preparing and saving images for the web. Here is what I typically do.

#1. Process in ACR (your typical exposure, highlights / shadows) no sharpening or noise reduction etc.
#2. Open up in PS and then:
a) levels
b) curves
c) sharpen either entire image of subject only
d) noise reduction background only
e) cropping
f) save tiff with aRGB
g) save jpeg with sRGB
h) convert to 8bit, sRGB and resize image at 750pix at 72dpi <----- this is my web image.

Now the problem I see having is that the web images are at times softer than the originals or the prints. Should I run sharpening and noise reduction again after I resize?
Again any help of what to change in my processing would be great.

[Dan Brown]

Hi Tom. Looks good. Here's my two cents. I would suggest that you convert your raw files in a proprietary program such as Capture NX2 for Nikon files or DPP for Canon files (I think, as I use nikon). This should produce a tiff of better quality than converting in ACR. Then open the tiff in ACR and proceed with your work flow as described. You might have to change some ACR preferences to open the tiff. I sometimes crop in NX2 or ACR, this yields a smaller file to work with in PS. Oh, I also do some selective dodging and burning with the Adjustment brush in ACR such as eye lightening and darkening bright whites a little. As for the jpegs, try sharpening them with Artie's suggestion of 125-.03-0 after you resize.

[Tom Cudzilo]

Hi Dan. Whats the point of going from DPP to ACR? I can pretty much do everything in DPP and avoid ACR.... but does it really help? I have not used DPP much at all because from what I remember it was much slowe than ACR. But I will give it a shot again with any new images. I do have Artie and Arash's guide... thank you for the suggestion.

[Marina Scarr]

I have not used DPP either, but I am going to go ahead and put it on my computer to use (or at least try out) for my images with higher noise. Otherwise, I am very happy with ACR.

[Dan Brown]

Hi Dan. Whats the point of going from DPP to ACR? I can pretty much do everything in DPP and avoid ACR.... but does it really help? I have not used DPP much at all because from what I remember it was much slowe than ACR. But I will give it a shot again with any new images. I do have Artie and Arash's guide... thank you for the suggestion.

Hi Tom. Using proprietary software to convert the raw file is suppose to produce an optimized file to start working with. Some folks feel this is the best way to go and some don't. I like what NX2 allows me to do as far as NR. It is an extra step. The story is that Nikon, Canon, etc produce their own file codes and do not share them with anyone (Adobe). So, for ACR, Adobe guesses at how to treat color, noise, etc. They do a fine job but not as good as the proprietary software.

[Jerry van Dijk]

Hi Tom, in my experience, presharpening the image as well as reducing the luminance noise in ACR before taking the image to PS results in sharper images than doing all of your sharpening in PS.
Regarding the softness of the reduced for web image: reducing image size requires extra sharpening to make the small image look as sharp as the original. You can do this manually, but the 'Save for web' function in PS has the bicubic sharper option which automatically sharpens the image after size reduction and gives very good results (so good that I wish that it was a regular sharpening option in PS as well). You can also adjust the image size here and change the bit depth and color space in one go. Another advantage is that you can optimize for a specific file size, e.g. to meet BPN's size criteria. I use it to prepare all my web images.
I do think 750 is on the small side for viewing on the web.
Hope this helps!

[Tom Cudzilo]

So I just had one of those OMFG moments. I know why pretty much all of my images look soft. I was applying sharpening the same way I was goind on my 30D and 1dmkII cameras before I got the 7D. I just tried doing what Daniel does in his PP and yeap. Everything went back to normal. I had no idea that the 7D file requires THAT much sharpening in post. This is most evident on landscape shots with lots of foliage.

[Marina Scarr]

PS: Sharpening is normally done at the very end of your PP process once you have resized your image. I do not sharpen any TIFF's unless I am going to print from them and then I only sharpen them after I have resized them according to print size.

[dankearl]

Here is my simple workflow.
I shoot Nikon, so only process in NX2.
I load photos in ViewNX, look at them, open the ones I like in NX2.
I crop first thing.
I adjust light levels,
Adjust color a tad,
Run NR on BG only.
Downsize for the web if I want to post them.
Sharpen with exact settings after downsizing. (Same settings every time)
Save to jpeg at whatever I need to to get under 250kb.
That is it, it only takes me a few minutes.
If I have to spend more time, the photo is usually not that great.
The less time I have to spend, the better the photo is.

[Jonathan Ashton]

I have used DPP extensively for about 8 months or so and I got very good results, I was entirely happy.
Since I bought CS6 I find no need for DPP, the raw converter in CS6 is absolutely superb and in my experience I get better results, the images are cleaner and less noisy and I think I can get better detail in shadows and highlights it makes sense to me to use in effect one seamless programme.
I am prepared to be shot down in flames but whilst it may appear logical that Canon and Nikon produce software that is better suited to their cameras I think it is equally logical to assume a giant like Adobe can also produce an equally well suited product - who knows what they do with their converter software for various cameras, it is obviously continually updated and modified.
Regards sharpening I use Perold's technique for the web, I think it is very fast and produces clean images.

[Ed Cordes]

I too, use PS and Light Room instead of the proprietary software from Canon. While DPP is OK I think the work flow and more comprehensive options provided by PS trumps the simplicity of DPP.

[arash_hazeghi]

IMO If you want the best quality from your Canon gear you need to use Canon software. The new version of DPP has everything that LR offers plus some things that LR cannot offer such as DLO.

[John Chardine]

The general rule of thumb is to reduce noise early and sharpen late in the workflow. Having said this I usually do a little "capture sharpening" in ACR or DPP.

Have a look at this excellent and very popular BPN thread on sharpening:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...read.php/18534

[Richard Unsworth]

Can I ask for a link to the latest DPP I always seem to have probs finding it
Currently I am using version 3.12.52.0

[Jonathan Ashton]

Rich you have the latest here is the link for UK/Europe
http://www.canon-europe.com/Support/...ownload&page=1
I downloaded it but cannot get the Digital Lens optimiser to work, I have downloaded the lens profiles but they are not accessed by the DPP programme. I made the mistake of deleting DPP to reload it thinking becasue the other associated Canon programmes were there this would be possible - wrong! I will have to dig out a CD from the attic.

[Richard Unsworth]

OK Jon thanks

search for way to get DPP on with noCD, I did as I dont have it with me here :-)

[Jonathan Ashton]

Rich I think it is a prerequisite that you have a CD, on the download site I think it says somewhere what exactly the minimum requirements are.

[Richard Unsworth]

PM me for details :-). everything working here including lens data

[Michael Todd]

I don't use DPP, but thought I would give it a try based on the information in this thread. I went to Canon's site and updated to the latest version (3.12.52.0) and it won't open. It tells me that the DPPViewer Module has stopped working and closes the program. Have I missed something?

[Richard Unsworth]

Michael

that is the latest version and should work
perhaps try a reboot? Did you have your version installed as the d/l is an update I think.
Other than that I guess you could try d/l again in case something went wrong.