Yes, the Capture Sharping is really very good. I just turned it off and used Shaprening Unsharp Mask: Also good, but not quite as. Then Shaprpening RL Devonvolution: Almost even better, maybe a bit too much of a good thing: The whiskers still come out much better, but the first artifacts are already visible in the skin.
Interesting…
I had more iterations in diffuse and cut back some. Aesthetically, I like the degree of sharpening in this effort:
dt 3.7
iBb_08.RW2.xmp (16.2 KB)
1 Like
I believe rl deconvolution and capture sharpening both use deconvolution methods, so you would apply one or the other, not both. When I’m in rt I usually combine capture sharpening with contrast by detail levels and that is enough for any situation.
CLBD is a nice module…very easy to use and introduces a nice effect. I have always revisited RT from time to time whenever I got stumped in DT. I then found ART and its compressed tool set and some unique features had me use that instead of the expansive dialogues of RT but when I go back to RT I see that tools that I thought were more or less identical are not in all cases. For me one is sharpening. I thought both used RL convolution and I think they do however the one in ART has less sliders and maybe its just the limited images that I have tried but the one in RT seems a bit better at least when using the defaults. Also not paying attention I thought output sharpening and capture sharpening were version of the same tool but they are not either. I love the masking in DT but some of the tool in RT are very nice.
Yes, that is also my experience: capture sharpening and contrast by detail levels - only these two, that is enough and is unsurpassed the best for me.
with your version, the skin is pleasantly soft. However, sometimes I find it better if the hair is shown clearer and sharper, that gives the viewer’s eye more hold.
what is CLBD for a moudul and in which software can it be found?
Transposed should be contrast detail by levels
Well, it’s me too - as much as I appreciate the Filmic RGB for some cases and the vast knowledge of its author, carefully crafted basecurve still holds much better results for my taste and it seems to be more gentle to highlights, even prettier blending those clipped regions with the rest of an image.
So I greatly hope that basecurve module will never be deprecated and removed from darktable 
3 Likes
It will never be removed, but its workflow is not the default anymore.
1 Like
Sounds good to me 
I understand scene-referred is future proof and piece of great science, although I like base curve so much 
Hello Underexposed Bill Martz,
with your version, the skin comes out very soft and tender - it’s very pleasant. But look at the whiskers: they are also very soft, already really blurred - that’s not unpleasant either.
Because of this discussion, I will seriously think about how much sharpness a picture needs. Especially with the small MFT sensor, I sometimes want more of it than the camera delivers. Also, with this portrait, you can definitely think about blurring as well. Not every old man needs to be shown crisply sharp.
With this request of mine, I wanted to know if experienced dt-users can sharpen the photo as well as I can with RT without any problems.
My impression so far: No, RT is clearly better at the moment. So I will stay relaxed with the program I have been using for years: RawTherapee.
Since I have never missed the masks so far, there is no reason to change for the time now.
Thank you all for your commitment.
Micha
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
1 Like
Since I haven’t opened RT in a couple years, would you mind posting a jpg so I can see what you like?
Hello Underexposed Bill Martz,
gladly, here is a jpeg developed with RT. Don’t pay too much attention to the color and tonal values, you can always improve them. Just look at the sharpness or clarity: the skin is good, not overly contrasty, still looks natural. And look at the hair of the beard and eyebrows: Incredibly vivid, spatial, realistic. I like that a lot. The eye of the viewer has something here where it finds a grip.
3 Likes
Thanks, micha. I see the difference, and it is substantial.
Unfortunately I find it impossible to properly sharpen an image in scene-referenced mode because the filmic module too much influences contrast and sharpness of the display-referenced intermediate result. Whatever sharpness I have found to be pleasing results in changes that make me change filmic settings which then mess up sharpness again and so the game begins anew. I can’t find a good balance and I never get to a workflow where I can take 10 or 100 images and run them through the same settings. It’s always a tedious, never ending search for a compromize between filmic and sharpness settings.
And don’t get me started on the wavelet madness of the contrast equalizer - that one is a torture for the image. There is no combination of settings between luma/chroma/edge that I would want to use on any of my images - wavelets are a poor choice for sharpening. They would be a good choice for creating a mask for the traditional unsharp mask to limit it to the detailed areas of an image - but to use raw wavelets IMHO is bonkers as there is no setting combination that will not result in artifacts or in an attempt to avoid these in too little sharpening.
@charlyw64 have you tried using the local contrast module? It is recommended to bring back the contrast that filmic nullifies, especially in the shadows and midtones. Then contrast equalizer can be applied gently.
Of course, you can always share frustrating images with us in the play raw threads, and you’ll have a bunch of edits to look at.
2 Likes
What about a highpass filter with a mask in overlay mode. IMHO a good method to achieve a decent sharpness. I couldn’t find any disadvantages with this, are there any?