Mike Chaney's Tech Corner

Hi,
I get emails asking, Now that we have DFS, what do I do with Tone Targeted Sharpening?

Nothing has changed in that area at all.

Deep Focus Sharpening is just the next gigundus step in digital sharpening, similar to Fuel Injectors replacing carburetors.
It replaces USM as the fuel injector replaced the carburetor.

So with that in mind, I submit a gentle image for your inspection and the control settings that I selected to bring out the effect I wanted.
Not too impressive on here, but amazing on the home screen. You will have to try your own to see.

So what did I do?
I Told TTS, "Do not sharpen the water. You can see in the second snap that "EX TONE" is selected and I clicked on the water as the color to leave alone.
Technically, that means sharpen everything except the color I selected.
The EQ slider automatically goes full right, which narrows the colors to fulfill the request.
Now I added some Radius and some strength and kept checking the distant shore for sharpening effect and the boats.

The effect I achieved looks like 3D on my screen and my print. Too bad I am limited to 128K here and have to compromise the quality to show it.

So I invite you to experiment and show some of what effects you get and how you did it.

Have some fun! Please!!

Fred

Something similar.
I excluded the water tone to avoid that being a distraction from the main subject.
Terry

Something different.
I chose to TTS saturated colours to pick out the Mickey Mouse dolls in their bright colours without affecting the box the box they are in.
Terry

Basic TTS, select a tone to sharpen to the exclusion of almost everything else.
This with big DFS numbers  :o ... to give contrast to the details.
Terry

Great examples, guys, as usual.  Terry, on the rose...WOW.  Just wow.  Got to go back and re-do some of my flower close-ups, now that I can do them properly.

Owen,
What am I, 'Chopped Liver' ?

 :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

Fred

Foie gras, very definitely.

Hey, I specifically said, "Great examples, guys."  Plural!  Plural!  Terry just happened to post an image that's similar to a lot of stuff I shoot.  Not much opportunity for me to shoot nautical scenes out here in the NW Illinois cornfields.

On your image, I wonder what would have happened if you had tried to apply that level of sharpening with USM instead of DFS.  I speculate that halos would have been apparent around the masts and lines.

With the size of image that we can attach, the differences are not easily seen. There are halos with USM, on the edge of petals and the rain drops and the whole appearance is more harsh.
Terry

We have flowers and chopped liver!

In the first image, the flowers are multi colored, and there's a black dragon fly. So not much point to Target One selected tone.
Much more logic to saying Sharpen everything except the green, or leave it alone and sharpen everything.

The other flower is just a beautiful flower, and I used Sharpen all except the green to make sure the eye was not distracted by any greenery.

Nah, Nah, na na nah.

I have flowers too

Fred

DOUBLE WOW!  Man, I've GOT to go back to my best flower shots and re-do them with DFS.

I've been traveling and otherwise away from these forums for quite a while, but you guys have certainly made it easy for me to get up to speed on what's new.  Great examples, likewise, in the "QU 2013 imminent" thread.

As I've said before, can you believe these forums are free?

Do it soon and show us the result please.  8)
Terry

It's too late already.
He lives in Northern Illinois.
You know how many people have been scampering to photograph the fall colors?

Owen is building snowmen!

Fred  (Who lives in Florida)

Another "basic" TTS with a slight twist, see below, my little place in the country  ;D
The tone of the building was selected to help make it stand out but the slider was set down to 65% so the foreground vegetation was sharpened a little too.
Reducing the slider in TTS reduces the selectivity of the TTS; thus in this case,  a degree of green etc. was included in the sharpening as well as building's red tones.
Terry

I'll tell you after tomorrow; I hope to do that in Gloucestershire.  :D
Terry

Okay, first attempt.  Perhaps not the best example, since I may not have applied proper sharpening to the original image.  But it's the same image I posted in this thread: http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage-ultimate/tts-neutrals/msg9880/#msg9880

First image: USM, radius 2, 150, slider at 80%.
Second image: DFS, radius 5, 400, slider at 80% (in next post)

Your comments, please.

Second image.

Not building snowmen quite yet, but it won't be long.

We've had wind & rain, so the fall colors are pretty much over down here.  However, we're looking at buying a cabin in northern Wisconsin.  Here's the view from the shore, taken about a month ago.

The results of the USM vs DFS are night and day..  Good Job

Thanks, Fred.  DFS certainly helped render the edges of the petals which overlap other petals.  That particular white-on-white detail was barely visible in the original.

And thanks again to you and Terry for the DFS tutorials.

I Might have used 300 instead of 400 in sample 2, but you have the actual image, and it's up to you.

I'll try it.  So far, a test print on 8½x11 paper looks good.

That's the RIGHT WAY!   Make a TEST print!!   
Thank you!!

F

Fred, Terry, and Mike...
 I think DFS is terriffic and fully understand that it is better than USM, and how it works .My original question to Mike...

http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage-ultimate/v2013-100-issuescomments/msg12667/#msg12667
 
and confusion  about the new DFS TTS, was centered around the fact that the title for the TTS tool in the application box still says USM Tone Targeted Sharpening rather than DFS TTS, or just TTS, leaving us to choose in the drop down pull out on the left side.
Just a matter of semantics  ;)

David

David,
I am missing where and what you are pointing to.

When I open the editor to get to the Sharpener, it says DFS. I have to actively change it to USM.
Now, perhaps you are opening old images with saved USM?

Please explain where I should look.
Thanks,
Fred

Above the amount slider it says "USM Tone Targeted Sharpening"  see on your screen capture.

what Dennis said Fred!
That is why I originally asked if Tone Targeted sharpening would implement DFS because the title above the slider still says USM Tone Targeting

The TTS slider box title  should probably just say Tone Targeting now, since there is a choice of either USM or DFS   TTS  ;)

Thanks Dennis and David..
I think, for a prize of 100 bucks, I still would have missed that

Ok, that's cosmetic, and should be an easy fix as soon as Mike reads some of this.
You are right though. It could be confusing.
Thanks
Fred

...or "USM/DFS Tone Targeting"

It's easy to overlook.  I did.  The first thing that catches your eye on the "new" screen is "DFS" in the drop-down box.

I've been doing some work on a portrait, taken against the light so with a bit of flare, that needs some agressive sharpening.

And then using the 'exclude' control on the skin tones to soften them.

I'll aim to post the results later today - but if anyone has any views about the best way to do this please let me know so I can incorporate them.

Tony

There are various ways to attack the sharpening of the image and the "softening" of the skin tones.

In all honesty, either Terry or I would have to see the actual image.
Just to point out the area that needs the actual image is when you say, "Use the Exclude control to soften the skin tones"

That isn't exactly right.... EXCLUDE means what it says. It will leave out the sharpening and exclude that tone from being sharpened, but it will not soften unless you use the additional, Soften everything else.

Sometimes, it's better (more control) to use a 3 radius and a MINUS 100 ( -100_ in the strength; Use sharpen selected!   The face tone which you selected will soften and adding the additional Sharpen Everything else, will apply.
It depends on what is the important part to soften.  Doing it this way allows the skin wrinkles to soften and the hair and eyes to stay sharp.

Really should get a copy of the image... 

(If you feel that you want to bother sending the image, could you send to Terry too, as I will be out a lot today.)

Fred

Here is my contribution to the QU flower show.  I don't normally shoot flowers, but when I got my D600 (with which I have already developed a love/hate relationship) - I had to go out immediately and shoot something! And there were lots of flowers and orange and yellow leaves.  Anyway, I patzkied around (that's a technical term meaning I didn't know exactly what I was doing) with the DFS settings on this - taken at f5.6 and a similar one at f11 - and think this works the best, radius 3, 250%, saturated colors.  Would like to hear perhaps some other ideas.  Mel W, Columbia, Md.

Hi Mel,
Thanks for contributing to the discussion.
Snap! as we say, I did the same when I got my 600D earlier this year - but I do like it and find it much easier to use than my old 350D both Canon not Nikon of course.
Back to the subject.
With my higher resolution 600D, I found I could/needed to use a higher radius even with USM but the percent value was usually less than 100%.
With DFS I find I have much more scope as no artefacts are created so I would expect your image would look ok with an even higher radius and possible a lower percent value. I'm not sure how may combinations you have tried but it is your personal taste in the end.
Another option to try for the TTS part would be to select one of the background tones and use Except. That would help to sharpen the dark centre of the red & yellow flower.
If you don't mind me commenting  ;)  :-[
Your image looks a little bright here. If you are using QU for raw, try less fill and or a click on the bottom right rectangle over yellow flower; that looks like it has some 255 RGB values. A blue rectangle may be enough, if not, go to mauve t fully recover. I often have a similar problem with yellow flowers.
If not using raw, lower brightness and a little more contrast.
Terry

Terry - 

Thanks for the suggestions - yes I will fool with it some more - I think you are right.  I was paying so much attention to sharpening, that I didn't look at some of the other basics - like exposure for example.

Mel

I've been in on DFS since the beginning and am still learning and going back to images I first tried with DFS and making changes. I would say that overall the values I use for DFS are not that much different than for USM on the average sort of image but it's much less likely you'll make a mess of sharpening an image with DFS and it's much easier to make a very good job of "difficult" images.
Terry

I would like to add two pence to Terry's post.
I get many emails asking what is a good number to start in Radius or how do I know when I have enough in the strength box?
Good Questions, but there are no precise answers because of factors like: The lighting in the image, the subject, foreground, background, a face.... old or young, wrinkles keep or minimize... on and on....

Next there's the approach!
Terry and I looked at an image we got from a forum member, and used the exact same settings in the REFINE screen and the CURVES in the Editor, and at first the exact same approach to the DFS too.
It was uncanny!
The picture was a beautiful woman(portrait style) sitting.... I woudl guess about 45 years old with the laugh wrinkles around the mouth and the eyes.
The photographer wanted to minimize the wrinkles. I took the approach os using Target Selected Tone and selected the skin color at the wrinkles, and then used a minus strength adding a request to Qimage to sharpen everything unselected which meant, everything except the face skin.

Where to start?
So I knew what I wanted to do, I put a -150 in the strength....   now what?
I clicked a 1 in the Raduis, and with the preview box open (it opens automatically), I held the yellow button to see With/Without the DFS.
I couldn't see any change, so I clicked a 2. Repeat the yellow button test. Barely see any change.
Clicked a 3. Now I can see just enough....
STOPPED THERE!
Do Not over sharpen...

My results were such that the wrinkles softened, but the eyes; the lashes and the irises and the eyeliner make up improved dramatically!
It was a good result.

I hope when Terry reads this, he will take a few moments to give you his approach...

There is no right or wrong!

Remember when I was showing the cat's face with DFS and how very high I could push teh numbers and still no halos or artifacts... ? I hope you all realized those very tall numbers like a 12/350 on that cat were for effect.
In my own cat picture I put them back to a nice level.
Just wanted to clarify....  I get emails, "But you used a 12 radius"... I was making a point! I don't sharpen my real pictures like that.

Questions and thoughts appreciated ...
Fred

Yes, I tried 2 different approaches.
First was basically the same as Fred's but rather than use -150% I tried 150% and set Except + with the skin tone selected (same as Fred). This had a similar effect but probably not quite as good as using the -150%.
Secondly, I pushed up the radius to 6! with RGB Except + and the slider at 90%.
I chose "RGB Except" as that is more selective than "Tone Except", the idea being it did not soften the hair too. The Slider at 90% just widened the selectivity a little and gave a good compromise with a softened skin and sharp hair.
The 6 radius made the skin softening more pronounced (I like to flatter the ladies  ;D) and the eyes, hair and teeth more "bite"  ;)

To explain, we cannot show the image because it's not one of ours but hopefully there's enough information to get the idea.

I agree of course. I would advise QU users to try approaches that are as different what Fred & I have tried, it only takes a few minutes to do it.
TIP: if you get a result that looks good but you want to try something else, save the filter, using say, the file number and a reference. You can then re-load that if you second attempt is not so good.
Terry
You can even go as far as making a copy image each with different filters and the use the comparator to choose the best.

I've seen some portrait photographers say that for a formal sitting portrait such as you describe, ONLY the eyes should be in sharp focus.  But have you seen the prices on those f1.2 lenses?

Good post.  Got to try your techniques on some informal portraits in my files.

Fred and Terry,

Thanks for these explanations and suggestions.  They provide me with a few more clues and approaches when using QU.

Vlady