You can sharpen the focus on most Nikon DSLRs and compact cameras in just 2 steps.
The photograph shows the Holy Trinity: Nikon 14-24 / 2.8, Nikon 24-70 / 2.8VR, Nikon 70-200 / 2.8VRII. But for sharp shots, you can cheat and not spend thousands of dollars on the purchase of expensive equipment.
The trick with sharpening is very, very simple. To sharpen, you should do just a couple of points:
- On the camera in 'Shooting Mode Menu' to find 'Picture Control'(on some Nikon cameras it may also be called'Control mode snapshots'), choose any you like (for example, PT - PorTrait, for shooting portraits), push the joystick button right and ask sharpness level '9'.
- In the Image Quality menu set RAW shooting format. After shooting, show the captured photos using the original free RAW converters: Nikon ViewNX-i, Nikon CaptureNX 2 or Nikon CaptureNX-D.
- Share a link to this article.
What is the point?
The bottom line is that Nikon ViewNX-i, Nikon CaptureNX-D and Nikon CaptureNX 2 during the conversion of the original RAW files sharpen much strongerthan the processor of the camera while shooting in JPEG format. We can say that this is such a bug (software error) that has become a feature (useful function).
Camera setup
The following is an example setup for the camera. Nikon D3200. On the rest of the cameras, everything happens by analogy.
First of all, you should configure 'Picture Control'. On some Nikon cameras it may be called 'Control mode snapshots'). Very old cameras may not have this mode at all. As far as I know, Picture Control appeared in second-generation CZK Nikon.
Picture Control Settings
Select the desired Picture Control. An asterisk next to a mode name means that it was manually changed. In the picture below, the 'MC' mode is unchanged with factory settings, and therefore does not have a '*' next to its name. Picture Control settings can be easily reset to factory defaults.
Select the desired Picture Control
Pressing joystick right, you can access the manual adjustment of the selected Picture Control. In this case, we are interested in sharpness. It needs to be set to maximum - this is position '9'. By default, the camera uses a sharpness level of '3'. Simply put - with one setting 'Increase. sharpness' can sharpen 3 times.
Manual Picture Control
Next, you need to set the image quality by setting the value to 'RAW'.
Image quality
Just choose 'NEF' (RAW):
RAW image quality
Important: on Nikon amateur cameras, Picture Control is available only in exposure control modes P, A, S, M. For such cameras as for Nikon D3200 from the example, one of these modes should be set.
P, A, S, M mode
If someone does not know how to shoot in modes M, A, S, Pthen this is not a problem. For such people I recommend setting the P mode, it will be 80% similar to the 'Auto' mode.
Converter setting
- Nikon CaptureNX-D can be officially downloaded here.
- Nikon ViewNX-i can be officially downloaded here. I recommend this particular program.
- Nikon CaptureNX 2 can be officially downloaded here.
In ViewNX-i, just select the desired folder where the RAW files are stored, select all (CTRL + A key combination), and convert them (CTRL + E key combination).
ViewNX-i program window. In the left pane, the active folder is selected.
Conversion can be performed with the right mouse button:
Thus, the conversion (export) of photos in the program ViewNX-i
Converting files can take a huge amount of time, especially on a weak computer. Sometimes you can display just a few photos and it will take very little time.
In my opinion, the advantage of this method is that you can use a free original program that understands very well the source RAW files.
You can read about the difficulty of choosing a RAW converter here.
Example
Shown below is the original shot taken directly with the camera. Such images are commonly referred to as 'on-camera JPEG' or 'in-camera JPEG'.
Original (small picture) received immediately from the camera
The image below was taken by converting the original RAW file using Nikon ViewNX-i. At the same time, there were no additional settings in ViewNX-i.
Image obtained by converting the source RAW file
The crop of the previous shots is shown below:
Crop 1: 1 from on-camera JPEG
Crop 1: 1 from converted RAW
The difference is clearly visible in the GIF animation:
Visual demonstration (due to the GIF animation format, the colors are not the same as in the original)
The "Sharpness" slider itself, both in the camera settings and in the settings of the native converter programs, has a strong effect on the sharpness. Below is a visual animation of the development of a RAW file with different sharpness level settings:
Visual animation of the sharpness level depending on the sharpness settings
True, this method has one unpleasant nuance. If you convert photos taken at high ISO values, the level of graininess and noise will be very strong and can only degrade the picture. In this case, on-camera JPEG can look much better.
All files used for this article can be download from this link.
Сonclusion
Sharpening with some Nikon cameras is easy. The algorithm, in short, is this: set the maximum sharpness in the Picture Control settings, remove it in RAW format and use the native converter. No complicated manipulations, no training in working with obscure programs, just a few mouse clicks, all programs are free, and the result is on the face.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
And how exactly does it work? Does contrast increase in development?
In the file's exec, by default, there is an instruction to “lift sharpness from the heart”.
When developing in the native developer, he reads this instruction and by default applies sharpe when converting
Vladimir, sharpening algorithms are diverse and non-trivial. It all starts with the debayerization of the image.
Thanks. It will be necessary to try in practice.
I do not know what to say…
One photo developed by NX-D, the other by DxO.
Thanks Arkady. Working.
Yeah, and get the brutal re-sharping
Overcharging, especially brutal, is unlikely to be obtained, since even the maximum setting in the camera or in the native converter has “foolproof”. By the way, here in the article previews are shown with 1200 pixels on the long side (a lilac shot, it is a full shot, not a crop), with a sharpness of 9, and what is there to see the brutal oversharp?
Is it really impossible to do the same in converters during development?
Sure you may. But for this, inexperienced users will need to perform another body movement, which, for example in NX 2, will take a bunch of computer time. In NX 2, when batch sharpening (or any other little thing), the computer will render all the photos in a new way. NX-D is already easier, the program simply creates a subfolder with the settings for each file and does not render the whole thing for hours.
Thanks, Arkady. A small offtopic. He showed a photo from the Nikon AF-S review Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 2.8GII ED N VR Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF, and noticed another “usefulness” in modern Nikon cameras, comparing your jpeg and files and those that I showed in LR . In LR, I applied a preset to all RAW files with the lens correction profile turned on (the LR lens selected the correct one). The geometry of the photos with the D3200 shown by you in Nikon ViewNX-I and me, in LR, is the same, but the files with the D700 are different, i.e. Nikon ViewNX-I understands distortion correction, which is included in your 3200 and is absent (or turned off) in the D700. And the correction that the camera does is the same as the correction that LR does with the default lens correction profile settings.
That's right, the Nikon D700 does not have a distortion control function, and therefore the NX-i does not perform any adjustment. Paid CaptureNX can also be adjusted with the Nikon D700 with a lens profile.
By the way, have you tried the new Capture NX-D?
I don’t know which one is new, I have NX-D 1.2.1, in fact, the last GIF was made with its help, because it was signed there.
I mean, can he correct the distortion of the photos taken by the D700?
Take a picture of the brick wall and see
To do this, I need to get the D700 somewhere and find a “brick” wall.
In general, I led to the fact that NX-D is newer than plain CaptureNX, free and wanted to find out if it has distortion correction profiles for the D700.
And here you send me the walls to take a picture.
Denis, NX-D version 1.3.0 corrects D700 distortion
Yes, the NX-D corrects distortion and vignette for the D700.
Thank you, Yuri.
moreover, he corrects the vignette with non-native lenses, and distortion - only with Nikons
Learn, children, how to roll out a whole coherent article from one complex sentence
I remember recently you did not know about this.
and sometimes the diapers got dirty ...
Thanks for the interesting stuff. The question has ripened. The camera has a built-in RAW converter. If you do the same operation on it, the result will not be as impressive as with ViewNX ?.
And the question is not on the topic of sharpness, but simply conversion- If you remove the RAW + Jpeg and RAW file, you simply convert it to ViewNX without any changes in the parameters, will such a picture be very different from the file already shown in the Jpeg camera?
The on-camera converter will give a very similar result, but not identical. As for sharpness, ViewNX is much sharper.
As for the development differences, I have described here https://radojuva.com.ua/2014/01/mos-6581/
thanks!!!!!
Everything was crazy about sharpness and bokeh. Learn to shoot!
You know, very often owners of whale lenses ask me how easy it is to achieve a sharp image. After I explain about focus accuracy, shutter speed and aperture, it turns out that nobody knows about the Picture Control settings. Users who have discovered additional settings for themselves are usually very happy. Actually, for them this article.
… Well, if the “user” does not know about the main software settings of his device, then this “user” has absolutely no reason to own the equipment that gives such opportunities. Why would he? Then to leave negative "reviews" and "opinions" on the forums regarding all the characteristics that he could not master? (Like: yellow-green, the skin tone is not the same, the pictures are not sharp, dark, noisy, scary, etc.) There is a tendency here: the more opportunities appear in modern technology of a mass price range, available to the “average user” (to which I am), the more “experts” appear among such “users” who give their negative assessment of the amazing opportunities that they have, but they have not been able to use them. It is as if a person bought a car, but did not know about the existence of the possibility to turn on the headlights, therefore he constantly complains about poor visibility. Stupid. But in my opinion this is karma.
You are saying something wrong. Many of my friends have advanced DSLRs, take pictures on the machine and do not write any reviews. They just take pictures for themselves. And the functions in the SLR and the full frame warm their soul.
... I do not write about your friends, because I do not know them))) I also take pictures mainly for myself. And a little more for money for others))) I do not have the most advanced DSLR (now it is Nikon D7000 and an old but good Pentax K10.) I bought them in order to be able to control the shooting process at my discretion, getting the result that I needed. You can shoot well “on the machine” with a soap box - why spend money on DSLRs? The automatic mode of a modern advanced SLR camera is approximately 5% of the capabilities it provides. Why pay for something you never use? However, there are a number of users who have fierce debates over what they are not comfortable with in modern technology. Bad color is the main theme. Although, if you sufficiently use everything that is in their cameras, then you can do whatever color you want. And when I hear that somewhere Canon is “blue”, Nikon is “yellow”, or Pentax is “brown”, I want to say to such “photographers”: yes, you finally open the instruction, read it from beginning to end. Then take your camera, and from the very first menu item to the last button, study it carefully, without letting go of the manual. Before drawing conclusions, test each function in practice. And then you will understand what you want to see in your photos, what color IT should be, and what needs to be done to make everything look exactly the same and not otherwise.
The fact of the matter is that this very auto mode is set up completely differently on different cameras; here are not only the features of the matrix, electronics and processing algorithms, but also marketing influences for different target audience. Hence the misconceptions, prejudices and legends about the mythical "skinton", or, they say, Kenon is better for a portrait, and Nikon is better for a landscape, etc. Different cameras give different results in auto mode, but you can get almost identical results in fine tuning. And it takes a lot of time to understand and feel, but it's so lazy ... :)
... I absolutely agree with you, there is nothing to add here. At the same time, I strongly disagree with the opinion of the “atypical Kievite” who thinks that automation also thinks. The machine adjusts its parameters based on the average values (up to neutral gray). Therefore, normal shots can only be in ideal shooting conditions. Practice shows that in ordinary life this is no more than 10% of situations. Everything else is not at all what you see and want to convey in the photo. In my subjective opinion, the automatic mode in the camera is needed only if you, for example, with your family got out into nature, did not take a tripod with you, want to take a family photo in which you want to see yourself, but do not want to be spoiled by any a certain person. Let's say mother-in-law. In this case, turn the camera selector to the “POINT AND SHOOT” position, give the camera to the mother-in-law, ask her to take a picture and voila, two birds with one stone will be lost at once. Success is 90% guaranteed - verified!
I will try to disagree with Alexander's comment. It is not always possible to shoot in the “Auto” mode the same “Point and shoot”. I got burned by my own experience. For the first time, in 30 years, relatives gathered, 32 people. I built everyone, shot more than a dozen group shots and, of course, decided to shoot myself. Tripod, as always, it was too lazy to take with you. I asked a stranger to take it off. Showed what and how. On the camera (D7000, 17-50 2,8 OS SIGMA) I set a “green sector” and gave the camera to a friend and asked to take five frames. After developing, NEFa saw that all five frames were not in the depth of field. Sharpness in all frames was in different parts of the frame. The reason is that everything is corny and simple. The camera set f-2.8, ISO-320, shutter speed 1/400. I had to "insert" myself into the frame in FS. So, your 90% cost me 0% and two hours of work in FS. And then I forgot that there is such a mode "Auto"
It seems to me those who are engaged in photo-docs, rather than taking pictures, complain.
The mirror and the full frame not only warms the soul, but also makes better pictures.
In 99% of cases, a DSLR machine will take a frame, at least not worse than even a more or less experienced photographer with manual settings.
... I will take the liberty of upsetting you: neither the DSLR, let alone the “full frame” takes pictures. This is done by a photograph (pinging). And a SLR camera is a tool with which he can do it ... or maybe not)))
If a person picks up a violin, it’s just a man with a violin.
If a person picked up a camera. then he is already a photographer.
And you, dear man, might think from birth you owned all these settings. You might think you were not that “user”.
This is the teaching to remove, if cho.
Thank you Arkady for delving into the bugs of nikon) but as for me, an amateur, this article made no impression, as I took off my family, I made my friends and acquaintances in a jeep. All of the above I can do in a photo-ass in a couple of clicks, no offense. Thanks to the author for the work done!
PS. waiting for new articles! eagerly!
As for Photoshop, I would argue. For a tape of photos in Photoshop, at least you will need to write an action, or, how do you plan to apply sharpening in a couple of clicks for 1000 pictures?
you yourself answered your question, and nobody canceled the lightroom yet)
that the most interesting is that 99% of mortals will not see any difference, because they look at the picture in general. it’s only we enlarge the picture 1000 times to look at the cilia)
This method is suitable for those who print posters from photos, or on billboards
these are not bugs, these are features
... in that case, sorry, but you still don't understand what the article is about. In Photoshop, you can do similar manipulations with JPEG, but the principle of their operation, and even more the RESULT, will be very far from the result obtained if you process the file in the native converter. This is very important for Nikon. Whoever says what, neither Photoshop nor Lightroom, nor any other editor can correctly read Nikon's RAW. In any case, it will be an interpretation, and as a rule it is not entirely correct. Personally, for the first time, after I first took Nikon in my hands (I shot for a long time exclusively with Pentax, sometimes I took Canon to shoot))) I could not get the color I needed in my photos. At the same time, Pentax (in this regard) was generally satisfied. Canon is not bad, but not mine))) I constantly compared the photos taken by the devices of these systems. And only after understanding the intricacies of settings and conversion features, the result surprised me quite tangibly. Maybe it looks like an advertisement, but my Nikon turned out to be good in color rendering so much that Pentax is already covered with dust, and Kenon is not needed for the simple reason that by applying certain settings (I even created a profile) I can get the same color, only with Nikon's dynamic range, amazing "rubber" RAWs and an amazing focusing system from Nikon)))
Alexander, it would be interesting to see this profile, as applied to one of the portrait photos that Arkady did in the previous review, for example. In general, it would be interesting for everyone to take one source for Arkady and do one processing option in the converter that everyone uses. And post here, as a separate article with discussions. To understand what trends exist in processing.
I am afraid that there will be hell and destruction. Acid colors from the underworld, embossed colors and strong contrast are in fashion nowadays beginners simply adore. Trends can be understood on Maveda or other major resources. You know my tastes are https://500px.com/arkadiishapoval/galleries/favorites
Everything is namano with your taste :), but you can make such an article, if there is a strong hell - delete some photos, business then. But there will be not empty words of readers: “C1 is the best” or “LR breaks everyone”, etc., someone said, and in response to him a link to the article - they say, show it :)
In modern trends, plastic faces tire.
But I like the colors. Go on tape, Arkady! Portra SF is waiting for you!
... but how to add several files in one message, tell me? To provide several profiles for "tearing" critics and not processed NEF converted to JPEG.
no way ..
You can make a separate page on your website or blog, put a bunch of photos with explanations there and give a link ... like this: http://lynxpro.ru/foto/plenka/agfa-100-color-prosrochka/
… Family photography. Slightly tweaked D-Lithing shadows / highlights in Capture NX2, converted to TIFF, then minor retouching in Photoshop, then downsized and converted to JPEG. "My Profile 1" applied
... here's another photo, using a completely different profile. Here the sun, morning, spring, so the profile is appropriate. The processing is the same: D-Lithing in Capture NX2, converting to TIFF, then minor touch-ups in Photoshop, then downsizing and converting to JPEG. Applied "My Profile 3"
worse than the first. and greens just addict slowly.
… I have a little, that's why I put it “at the mercy”: I would like to hear the opinions of professionals. There is a lot of blue in the frame, hence the parasitic shades. Plus the profile is coldish. However, somewhere it looked like this: sun, morning, blue clothes and so on ..)))
No, the fact is that you have wound up the color saturation, but in a frame of this type, IMHO, it should have been arid
Oh, yes, I was just thinking about you ... at 19 o'clock Moscow time, Shadrin starts a course on baaz color correction .. http://www.profileschool.ru/category/graphics/mk_fundamental_color_correction it's worth it.
Just half an hour before the start
... there are still profiles for studio shooting, although the standard ones are quite suitable here. Here's one file offhand.
…here's another. Standard.
pleasantly.
... but with a minimum of processing. My profile.
skin tone and raised blue - stress
It would be better if the fountain was not behind. And that he also took part in the shooting. It should be wet and splash. And so it is amateurish. Well, sort of, no offense, this is at the beginning of the journey ... Shoot more and more often. Excessive sharpness really makes the photo cheaper.
... the same day, the same profile, the same processing, slightly different shooting conditions.
similar to previous
... there is a little deception, especially for the subtle connoisseurs of skintones: the blouse is not really gray. In reality, it has a slight (purple) tint. Knowing that most experts are immediately looking for a neutral gray, to complicate the situation, a lilac golf was deliberately put on under a blouse (don't believe it). Therefore, tricks with gray do not work here, it is worth evaluating the general atmosphere, and not individual details. Yes, skin tone in color proof, taking into account being among the greenery, is not far from ideal. Your opinions are very useful and interesting, thanks)))
There is such a moment. In current photography, there is a tendency to move away from endless calorimeters and find out whether the dress is white or blue. In general, if it's a question of color and perception - welcome to YouTube. Google - Alexey Shadrin. After two weeks of watching his publicly available video, stuff your boiled brains back into your skull and go sign up for his courses.
Good luck.
... in general, gray is not always worth trusting. In gray it is not always what the photographer saw, the same color. In such situations, of course, you can fix everything with masks, but in this case I didn't.
Lies and slander.
Gray is a clear-cut guy and is always responsible for the market.
... and for the most sophisticated connoisseurs of this "SKIN-tone"
Your best job
... you understand, dear Lynx, I am an amateur. I love Radozhiva because here you can share your thoughts, find out what others think about the questions that interest me. Sometimes I post some photos, hoping for more or less serious comments, ratings or advice. In the end, a burning and fair criticism. And certainly not on your duty sarcasm. I appreciate your humor no less than you, but respect the rules of good "skin tone")))
You joked, I laughed too (c) Boromir
Thank you, Alexander
After the pentax, I also didn’t like the colors in the lightroom, there was some dirt in the skinton.
Until I tried DxO
Try it, maybe you will like it.
can you share how you created the color correction profile, and in which program?
... there is a wonderful X-Rite ColorChecker Passport utility that does almost everything automatically, in my case from DNG. You can even choose different lighting conditions for the same profile! There is also a plug-in for Lightroom for it, but due to the fact that I do not use the latter, it did not take root. I'll clarify that I created the color profiles for Adobe Camera Raw. And for the camera there are several custom modes created in Capture NX2 and in the camera itself.
All these profiles are from the evil one. To get good photos, all processing must be done manually, since there is only one profile, and there are several photos and they are all different, even if they were taken under the same conditions. It turns out that you want to automate photo processing, this is the same if you make a painting machine that would rivet masterpieces.
Totally agree with you. However, how can you sometimes want the most adequate color reproduction by default? Not "juicy", not saturated, not warm, cold, dull, bright or whatever, but just A-DEC-WAT-NOY! This is what the eye saw. And this, alas, is unrealistic. Not in film, not in digital. Even after all the dances with tambourines in all imaginable and unimaginable converters and editors. With no iron. In none of the systems I know. They just haven't matured yet. IMHO.
In my opinion, the impossibility of “adequate color rendering” is explained by the subjectivity of the observer - depending on the mood, state of health, etc. Sometimes it seems CMOS-matrix adequately conveys colors, and when - not good.
What profile did what settings?
I shoot with old, kind, fabulous manual glasses. And I try to squeeze maximum sharpness out of the optics. So on Jupiter 37a, with a maximum of 3.5, I even have to sometimes reduce it in portraits. Thanks for all the articles, you always learn a lot!
... or “How to add“ warm digital noise ”to your photographs :) :) here, sharpe is not too intelligent, and sharps everything, not just the right thing, turning a soft background into a noisy grain (crop of lilac branches).
In general, those who need per-pixel sharpness will come in handy. But in general, I think it is inexpedient to artificially raise the detail where it was not initially there.
But seriously - 2 photos at the beginning, lilac with 1200 pixels on the long side with 100% compression quality. Oversharp, or the eye cuts or bokeh in the grain? The real picture is not a crop. In fact, sharpening is common in today's mass photography. For users with massive whale lenses, a sharp can really improve the picture.
By the way, I want to write an article about printing photos. In a few years, I printed about 300 photo books in different photo labs and realized that noise was consumed in the press, and oversharp often improved the visual perception of the picture.
The difference can be seen at 100% magnification. In real conditions and when printing on paper, it is hardly noticeable at all. Those. there is a possibility of sharpening, but the expediency is questionable.
This is just a personal opinion, not claiming the truth :)
under the usual sharpe seal, IMHO you need to tighten up.
Yes, and for webcam too.
I completely agree
Excellent article
As always, great article!
You can also experiment with the rest of the sliders.
Thank you!
Tell me, will it work with LightRoom?
Who or what will work with LR?
Arkady, how's what / who? Even about what you wrote in the article.
no, it will not
Sharpening is relevant for native converters.
He has been working with lightroom for so many years .. Only in secret, shhh !!!
Dap useful and necessary Arkady wrote. Dap of different chips revealed to us, teapots. But this will not add talent ...
I shoot in raw on a PC neutral, and then wind up the sharpness in the lightroom, if necessary. I also adjust color and contrast. I don’t see the point of sharpening sharpness in PC, as well as using D-lighting.
Good article. But to climb into the camera settings of Picture Control - laziness.
If CaptureNX2 in the Develop => Camera Settings => Picture Control section apply a custom setting using the Load Picture Control Utility, will the result we get equivalent to what Arkady suggests?
check tell us.
Yes.
In Picture Control in general, you can make many different settings options.
Including with contrast, color, brightness.
I read to the end and immediately tried it on my D800 and was very happy with this result. Your suggestion: “Users who have discovered additional customization are usually very pleased. Actually, this article is for them too ”. THANKS.
A good setting for this sharping, as well as "brightness / contrast" in Photoshop, especially for low quality scanned text - allows you to read the text normally and its recognition is better done by special programs. And Picture Control is really a very useful thing, and fine adjustments are really not so intuitive to open. Good article.
A great way to sharpen. Everything is simple and without unnecessary troubles. Arkady, thanks for the useful article.
And you can buy Olympus and immediately get sharp shots :)
Yes .. or a soap box and generally does not soar.
Well, why splurge on a soap dish, because there is a PHONE.
By the way, yes, Pavel Kosenko and his iPhone 5S with a "deterrent" fully support you
sorry, 6S
Eh ... Have you looked at the prices of phones and compacts for a long time?
Now even the phones are being removed;)
Nikon in flight.
In what sense?
Well, the phones are shot in a rav.
Nikon's last trump card is beaten.
mmm
So you were silent before!
* ran to the store losing slippers
have a good shopping
And I’ve heard many times that in the cell, finally can’t put anything! All in minus. And even in Lightroom, processing RAW, it is recommended to set the sharpness to zero.
And only when processing in Photoshop, raise the sharpness after all the manipulations with the frame ...
There are nuances here. LR can pull sharpness from the source, from the buyer's subpixels. If after that you convert it to tiff / jpeg, and then drag with Photoshop, the effect will be different, the sharpness will work with the de-eyed image. But, in fact, if the result is obtained in any other way, you can do it as you like.
Here are sample photos taken in this way.
All Alexandra do not know who wrote. Although I am also Alexander. I looked at the picture for a long time. The picture is good, but not mine ... I would still darken a little, but skin tone, what skin tone? Everything is fine ...
Examples are YOU! :-)
Nikon D800, Nikon 50mm f / 1.4D AF Nikkor lens
f / 4,5
By the way! It immediately reduces the script! Who is interested in the larger size or EXIF, write letters :-)