Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1
Resolution is the most familiar of the two perceptual factors contributing to sharpness. We've already
looked at how much resolution is needed. You may start at 100 lp/mm (though typically not more than
50 lp/mm) but along the way if you end up with 10 lp/mm on a print you'll have a very crisp image
indeed, and even 5lp/mm on a print is considered critically sharp by many observers. (To be
scientifically accurate you actually should have somewhat more resolution than this (maybe 30 lp/mm)
on a low contrast image because of acutance effects).
Acutance is the less understood characteristic of sharpness. Acutance isn't about resolving detail, it's
about the transition between edges. In other words when an edge changes from one brightness level to
another. This is what Sharpening in digital parlance is all about. Scanning and digital capture softens
acutance and so we apply a (ill-named) process called an Unsharp Mask to increase edge sharpness
back to what it should be. Remember, this has nothing to do with resolution, the other aspect of
sharpness. Unfortunately some anti-digital Luddites still confuse the two.
Grain
Our perception of sharpness depends to a large extent on how much detail an image contains.
Frequently an image with moderately coarse but sharp grain (or crisp digital noise) can appear as sharp
or even sharper than a fine-grained image. This is why high-acutance film developers such as Rodinal
have historically been preferred by some. They made grain somewhat bigger, but gave it higher
acutance and therefore aided in creating the appearance of a sharper image.
Conversely an image with fine but soft grain (for whatever reason) will drag down the general
appearance of sharpness that a given image might otherwise have.
Interestingly, completely grain-free images can appear to be less sharp than the resolution numbers
might lead one to believe. This is the case with the old Panatomic-X and Tech-Pan films. They are so
grain-free than they can appear less than critically sharp if the image doesn't contain a lot of fine detail.
Along the same lines, in the digital realm it's my experience that the Canon D30 at 100 ISO is so free
of digital noise (the equivalent of grain) that in some images it can almost appear to be less sharp than a
400 ISO frame from the same camera.
Inkjet Prints
There are some folks who haven't yet seen well-made high quality inkjet prints, and who therefore
mistakenly believe that these somehow can't equal traditional chemical prints in terms of sharpness. It's
worth noting that a 6 colour 1440 dpi inkjet printer (like the Epson 1270 / 1280 / 2000P Photo printers)
when fed a 360 dpi output file, is capable of about 16 pixel per millimeter. This translates to 8 lp/mm
— right in the high-end of the ballpark for meeting the limits of human vision's ability to discern
maximum sharpness.
This also explains why the latest generation of printers speced at 2880 dpi (like the Epson 1280/1290)
don't make prints that look any sharper to the naked eye. Under a loupe, yes, but not unaided. The
2
reason why, we can now appreciate is because at about 8 lp/mm we are already near the limits of the
eye's ability to resolve fine detail. All we end up with is slower print speeds and greater ink usage.