Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
From | Eric Stevens |
Date | 09/16/2014 00:33 (09/16/2014 10:33) |
Message-ID | <h2qe1at234ulkvm6u2bvbael7k3iht3vrm@4ax.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Savageduck |
Followups | Savageduck (36m) > Eric Stevens nospam (2h & 21m) > Eric Stevens |
SavageduckI will tell you that you are discussing a point which is not the point raised by Floyd. So too is nospam, but that is not surprising.
On 2014-09-15 16:39:45 +0000, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) said:Floyd L. DavidsonSavageduck
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>wrote:nospamFloyd L. Davidson
In article <87bnqh1mby.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:Floyd 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.
I fully expect you to tell me I am wrong.