Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 09/15/2014 19:32 (09/15/2014 13:32) |
| Message-ID | <150920141332075696%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Savageduck |
| Followups | Savageduck (23m) > nospam PeterN (21h & 41m) > nospam |
In article <2014091510153710516-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:
true, but i was thinking of lightroom where no additional steps are required because everything is non-destructive.SavageduckFloyd L. DavidsonFloyd L. Davidsonnospam
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.
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.
09/13/2014-
