If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
In article ,
nospam wrote: In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. i absolutely do know the meaning, since it's all i use. it's you who doesn't understand what a non-destructive workflow means and as a result, says stupid **** like what you just did. with a non-destructive workflow, unsharp mask (or anything else for that matter) can be altered or removed after the fact. that's why it's called a non-destructive workflow. it's not on your file then. whatever... you could, of curse create an extra layer and delate it later. -- teleportation kills http://tinyurl.com/androidphotography |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
In article 2014091510153710516-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. I know your feelings regarding Photoshop, but using Adobe's *Smart Object* concept provides a different level of non-destructive workflow. Creating a new adjustment layer and converting it to a *Smart Object* gives one the ability to apply any filter, including USM and any of the other sharpening tools or filters to that *Smart Object*. If the particular adjustment results are not to one's liking, then double clicking on that filter in the *Smart Object* layer will reopen the filter dialog to allow changes to the filter parameters. In the case shown below I have applied USM to a *Smart Object* and I can return to it as often as I want to adjust the USM parameters, all non-destructively. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_900.jpg All adjustments made to *Smart Objects*, in Photoshop terms, are non-destructive. true, but i was thinking of lightroom where no additional steps are required because everything is non-destructive. with photoshop, the user has to take additional steps to be non-destructive. I fully expect you to tell me I am wrong. of course. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
On 2014-09-15 17:29:05 +0000, android said:
In article , nospam wrote: In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. i absolutely do know the meaning, since it's all i use. it's you who doesn't understand what a non-destructive workflow means and as a result, says stupid **** like what you just did. with a non-destructive workflow, unsharp mask (or anything else for that matter) can be altered or removed after the fact. that's why it's called a non-destructive workflow. it's not on your file then. whatever... you could, of curse create an extra layer and delate it later. With most photo editing software which uses adjustment layers that is one method of non-destructive editing. The final product with adjustment layers intact can be saved as a PSD or TIF to be reopened at any time to adjust further, remove adjustment layers etc. Obviously merging those layers will make those adjustments permanent. Then Adobe has a second level of non-destructive editing with the use of *Smart Objects*. ....and non-destructive editing in Lightroom is something else all together. These days with my LR+PS workflow many of my images make a round trip from LR to PS and back to LR have all the layers retained. If I need a JPEG I use the LR export dialog. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
On 2014-09-15 17:32:07 +0000, nospam said:
In article 2014091510153710516-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. I know your feelings regarding Photoshop, but using Adobe's *Smart Object* concept provides a different level of non-destructive workflow. Creating a new adjustment layer and converting it to a *Smart Object* gives one the ability to apply any filter, including USM and any of the other sharpening tools or filters to that *Smart Object*. If the particular adjustment results are not to one's liking, then double clicking on that filter in the *Smart Object* layer will reopen the filter dialog to allow changes to the filter parameters. In the case shown below I have applied USM to a *Smart Object* and I can return to it as often as I want to adjust the USM parameters, all non-destructively. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_900.jpg All adjustments made to *Smart Objects*, in Photoshop terms, are non-destructive. true, but i was thinking of lightroom where no additional steps are required because everything is non-destructive. These days with my LR+PS workflow many of my images make a round trip from LR to PS and back to LR have all the layers retained. If I need a JPEG I use the LR export dialog. Yup! That is quite a different non-destructive process which quite a few here have yet to grasp even though they own LR. Since this thread relates to the application of USM and/or other sharpening, I left LR out of the discussion. I am still unsure of what Alfred uses for his post processing. with photoshop, the user has to take additional steps to be non-destructive. Once you have developed a PS non-destructive workflow, it is easy enough to execute. I fully expect you to tell me I am wrong. of course. ;-) -- Regards, Savageduck |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
In article 2014091510560662452-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote: All adjustments made to *Smart Objects*, in Photoshop terms, are non-destructive. true, but i was thinking of lightroom where no additional steps are required because everything is non-destructive. These days with my LR+PS workflow many of my images make a round trip from LR to PS and back to LR have all the layers retained. If I need a JPEG I use the LR export dialog. very few of mine need photoshop anymore. Yup! That is quite a different non-destructive process which quite a few here have yet to grasp even though they own LR. Since this thread relates to the application of USM and/or other sharpening, I left LR out of the discussion. I am still unsure of what Alfred uses for his post processing. lightroom does usm. with photoshop, the user has to take additional steps to be non-destructive. Once you have developed a PS non-destructive workflow, it is easy enough to execute. it's not hard, but it is additional steps that aren't needed in lightroom which is non-destructive by design. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
On 2014-09-15 18:26:01 +0000, nospam said:
In article 2014091510560662452-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote: All adjustments made to *Smart Objects*, in Photoshop terms, are non-destructive. true, but i was thinking of lightroom where no additional steps are required because everything is non-destructive. These days with my LR+PS workflow many of my images make a round trip from LR to PS and back to LR have all the layers retained. If I need a JPEG I use the LR export dialog. very few of mine need photoshop anymore. Yup! That is quite a different non-destructive process which quite a few here have yet to grasp even though they own LR. Since this thread relates to the application of USM and/or other sharpening, I left LR out of the discussion. I am still unsure of what Alfred uses for his post processing. lightroom does usm. …but it isn’t presented to the user as such. It appears in the detail pane labeled “Sharpening” with somewhat different parameters to those found in the PS USM. That those parameters (other that percentage & radius) have different labels to those found in PS USM are probably of little significance, but many users might well not recognize them as the same process in different applications. with photoshop, the user has to take additional steps to be non-destructive. Once you have developed a PS non-destructive workflow, it is easy enough to execute. it's not hard, but it is additional steps that aren't needed in lightroom which is non-destructive by design. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. i absolutely do know the meaning, since it's all i use. it's you who doesn't understand what a non-destructive workflow means A non-destructive workflow means you can *undo* and then *redo*. That is not a reversible function. For example, you can add sharpening with a high pass sharpen tool to an image, save it as a JPEG, send it to someone else, and they can use a blur tool to reverse the sharpen. If the sharpening is done with UnsharpMask that cannot be done. USM is not reversible. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Lenses and sharpening
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote: UnSharpMask is not reversible. it is with a non-destructive workflow. I'm sorry that you don't understand the meaning of that. i absolutely do know the meaning, since it's all i use. it's you who doesn't understand what a non-destructive workflow means A non-destructive workflow means you can *undo* and then *redo*. That is not a reversible function. it is to the user, which is what matters. in other words, the user sharpens today and then tomorrow or next month or whenever, they can readjust it or remove it entirely. that means to the user, it's reversible. that's why a non-destructive workflow is so powerful. For example, you can add sharpening with a high pass sharpen tool to an image, save it as a JPEG, send it to someone else, and they can use a blur tool to reverse the sharpen. not perfectly. you even said 'virtually reverses' in your description. that's another way of saying 'there is some loss.' In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: Not the case. It is the high pass sharpen tool that is the inverse of blur. They can use the exact same algorithm with different parameters. Using one and then the other virtually reverses the results. If the sharpening is done with UnsharpMask that cannot be done. USM is not reversible. in a destructive workflow that is true. in a non-destructive workflow, it is not true. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sharpening | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 23 | April 3rd 13 06:57 PM |
Sharpening | Ockham's Razor | Digital Photography | 11 | February 6th 07 09:35 PM |
Am I over-sharpening? | Walter Dnes (delete the 'z' to get my real address | Digital Photography | 12 | February 9th 06 07:58 AM |
RAW sharpening | embee | Digital Photography | 11 | December 24th 04 04:43 PM |
D70 on-camera sharpening vs. Photoshop sharpening | john | Digital Photography | 7 | July 23rd 04 10:55 AM |