Photo processing resizing - bicubic sharper or manual sharpen?
 

I wonder if you use "bicubic sharper" when you resize images for web (for smaller sizes like 720 px).

The result is sharper than Photoshop default "bicubic", but to me the it looks somewhat flat. Like it looses mid-tones.

Now I wonder what do you do if you have like 300 photos to process: do you use bicubic sharper or manual sharpening via Unsharp mask/ Smart sharpen?

Bump cause thats a good question

If on photoshop, try playing with this Action

http://truebabes.com/uploads/UnsharpMask.atn

5-6 steps, so you can quickly compare

Very interesting Jimmy, very nice result. Btw, do play with the levels as well when retouching a photoset?

From my experiences it pays if the photoset didn't turn out well and whites and blacks on a photo are shifted. You can fix the exposure of the photo by manually setting the darkest and lightest area in Levels, but ISO noise appears then. I personally believe photo doesn't need to t be retouched, if the photographer did a good job. Sharpening when resizing should be enough.

Oh Heavens, yes play with levels, all sorts of stuff depending on what I am looking for.

Also use some plugins.

http://thepluginsite.com/

I honestly find very little need to worry about sharpness.

How many producers use color space cards for setting levels?

I'm thinking that if you can get your content source to do so, that's the best help. Then process through lightroom to adjust levels, use bicubic and be done with it. Will be as accurate as to what the photographer was going after, one would think.

We're going to try this with one of our producers and see what happens. Oddly-lighted rooms are some hard to batch process sometimes...

Of course, color/gamma corrected monitor profiles are a must, too, otherwise, what might look like needing a touch more level adjustment or even sharpness, may not actually need it once viewed with a correct profile.

not sure how much of my theories are correct, but personal taste on my part maybe?