Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 09/17/2014 11:46 (09/17/2014 11:46) |
| Message-ID | <slrnm1imjh.1j5.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | Savageduck (3h & 52m) Eric Stevens (17h & 29m) > Sandman |
In article <ka1i1a56i1u0u9fr6gljrjqv3cgfkm7lau@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
Not really, no.SavageduckEric Stevens
It seems that you have never worked with a truly non-destructive workflow, with Photoshop and Lightroom I have a totally reversible workflow which can deal with reverting crops, spot removal, content aware fill, content aware move, any of the various grad filters available, and filters, including the notorious USM.
The reason that all this argument is underway is that you and nospam fail to recognise that a "totally reversible work flow" is one thing but a reversible process is another.
reversible adjective able to be reversed, in particular: • (of the effects of a process or condition) capable of being reversed so that the previous state or situation is restored
That fits both scenarios. Floyd is stubbornly trying to force everyone else to have "reversible" mean that a process needs another process to reverse its effect, but that's not how the word works. Floyd is notoriously ignorant about word meanings, so no surprise there.
The undo function in Photoshop makes any process reversible, simple as that. If you want to be able to save the file and reverse USM when opening it again, use smart filters. That means that USM is 100% reversible at any point in the future, on any image.
What Floyd has been saying is that sharpening with a high-pass filter is basically the same as Gaussian blur except that one goes forward and the other goes backwards. Whatever you do with one can be undone with the other. This is not the same as just cancelling the operation as you do when you delete it from a sidecar file.Of course it's not the same. That doesn't mean that deleting an instruction that leads to a specific result doesn't mean the instruction is reversible. The fact that you *can* delete it means that it is by definition reversible.
In fact, "Reversible" comes from the word "reverse", which means "move back". The undo function is the most obvious example of a reversible process.
Deleting (or turning off) an instruction in a non-destructive workflow reverses its affect on the result.
-- Sandman[.net]
09/13/2014-
