Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 09/16/2014 17:01 (09/16/2014 11:01) |
| Message-ID | <160920141101515850%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Followups | Floyd L. Davidson (1h & 36m) > nospam Eric Stevens (13h & 12m) |
In article <87lhpjzwb6.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:
the correct term and the one used by everyone except you is a non-destructible workflow.SavageduckFloyd L. Davidson
So? The fact still remains, regardless of personal opinion about Adobe, Lightroom, & Photoshop, those using that software have the ability to maintain a fully non-destructive, and reversible workflow, that includes reversing the effects of any filter including USM.
It's not a "reversible" workflow. The correct terms would be either a non-linear undo, or simply that it can be reverted.
wrong.SavageduckFloyd L. Davidson
âEUR¦and if you are going to start that reverse mathematical operation from a compressed, & lossy JPEG, good luck getting back to where you started.
Your workflow, even if non-destructive, will be totally unable to deal with reverting any previous editing with the exception of processes, such as sharpen (not USM), that are reversible.
in a non-destructible workflow, *everything* can be altered, adjusted or removed at any time, including unsharp mask, cropping and retouching.
you've clearly never used such a workflow and are talking out your butt.
09/13/2014-
