In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

Clark Vision have published articles describing their tests with all
these things using Photoshop. See for example
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration2/index.html

Read it a little closer Eric, Roger Clark did not use
PhotoShop for Richardson-Lucy Deconvolutional
sharpening, he also didn't even mention the Wavelet
sharpening that I have previously commented on.

read it closer yourself. what he *didn't* use was the gimp.

photoshop has deconvolution built-in, but if that isn't to your liking,
there are plug-ins available that can do exactly what you want.

Clark does describe Unsharp Mask using PhotoShop to be
specifically much the same as USM is in other editors.

no surprise there.

in fact, usm and many other image processing functions are built into
os x itself on both mac and ios. it's basically one line of code.

He also points out the "Smart Sharpen" is the kind of
problem that I described, where the user cannot tell
what it might do. Some settings may use a different mix
of two or more types of sharpening. It's the kind of
thing you just adjust until it looks "wonderful", and
have no idea if that setting would also be useful on the
next image or not.

nonsense. if you use it you'll know what it does or doesn't do and
whether it's appropriate for the 'next image' or not. you can also
choose to not use it at all.