First resizing - then sharpening.

[rottie102]

I had a chat with a photographer friend today.

I was pissed off that his photos look much sharper, I've tried shooting with his Canon 24-105mm and the difference between his and my shots was absolutely minimal. Yet his small versions for Flickr etc look so much better.

He told me that he first does all the basic editing in Lightroom, saves as a full size JPG, then resizes the photo in Photoshop and THEN sharpens the minature using smart sharpening in Photoshop. And indeed - it makes a hell of a difference.

Why is that?

[Simpo Two]

Because sharpening is relative to image size. If you sharpen, then resize, you spoil it.

And counter-intuitively, the smaller the image, the more sharpening it needs (not like yer optical stuff).

Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 1st October 21:35

[Ed_P]

Also, when resizing in Photoshop, it's recommended to use the "Bicubic Sharper" option if reducing the file size rather than the default "Bicubic". It does seem to make a difference.

[andy-xr]

I do both, usually sharpen after editing using the Sharpen tool, then resize and smart sharpen. If its involving certain things like hair I'll generally add a layer mask and something like a 50% brush so it doesn't look to mental

Occasionally I've used a high pass set to Overlay and reduced the opacity of the layer a bit

[GetCarter]

Always resize, then sharpen. You then sharpen the current image, not the image that was in a past life.

[RobDickinson]

Simpo Two said:

Because sharpening is relative to image size. If you sharpen, then resize, you spoil it.

And counter-intuitively, the smaller the image, the more sharpening it needs (not like yer optical stuff).

Listen to this guy....

Sharpening should be done last and at the size of the output and for the output type (print/web etc).