Image seems soft

[Michael Fanelli]

Now that you mention it, why is that digital images need sharpening?

I'm not an expert but I know it has to do with the loss of " acutance" during the digital process. Acutance is a complex topic that boils down to sharpness. Digital loses actuance because of information that is getting lost. From Luminous Landscape: "...we resort to the old law that two wrongs make a right. We throw away even more information in the hopes that what is left gives the illusion of the original acutance."

Adding back sharpness takes experience. I know I grossly oversharpened when I first started out. Some consumer P&S cameras do this in-camera. People love them at first but, after a while, start to see problems. It takes a careful balance! This is why I make very sure to keep the original images in a safe place. When I learn more, I can go back to these originals and try again!

[mjs1973]

I was just reading a book today about post processing digital images. They talked about waiting till the final step to sharpen the image. The reason behind this is that the more you work with an image, the softer it becomes. Is this accurate? I have heard people say on these boards that they sharpen in small amounts throught the entire post processing process. Is there a right or wrong time to add sharpening to the process of creating you image?

[OldSchool]

I'm no professional, but I sharpen last. And I sharpen it depending on what the purpose is.

If the image is full resolution and I'm planning on printing it, I may sharpen some with the radius less than one pixel -- if needed... I do not like the paper doll "cut-out" look of over-USMed images. Note also, that an image sharpened for printing may look over sharpened on your monitor.

If you down-size an image for posting on the web (like here at PR.com), then sharpening is definitely required to bring back the crispness of the original.

BR,
Tim

[setiprime]

Siberia1997- You said in your first sentence that you are new to digital. You obviously have photography experience in film, judging by the way you phrase your questions.

There are a couple things that you should be aware of as generalizations for digital shooting.

I own and shoot Canons (300D and 20D) so my comments are related to these devices primarily.

Canon designs and builds their DSLR models to give the shooter, a bunch of options that P&S generally lack. They also set defaults to the least amount of "in-camera" processing, letting the owner set parameters to their own preferences.
A common complaint from new DSLR shooters is the fact that their shots look soft, out of focus, flat, etc. Much of this is due to my statement above. Many people are used to the oversaturated/crisp prints from labs and sub-conciously expect their own shots to look the same.
If you cruise the different forums, you will notice how many topics deal with post-production of the images and the various software packages used by digital folks.
The simple fact is that now YOU are the lab/darkroom. Along with the digital technology of cameras, you (like it or not), are it. Some love it (me) some hate it, but we all have to do it.

My second comment is the lens issues you bring up. Again the focusing points you chose have an effect - your focusing parameters (AI,AI servo, etc) have an effect - your sensor size is smaller, as the focal length increases your DOF decreases - on-and-on.

There is a definate so called learning curve and it sounds like you are getting into it full bore.

Hang in there - all will be revealed !