Eric Stevens
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:39:44 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:

Savageduck
On 2014-09-17 04:23:29 +0000, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>said:

Eric Stevens
What then is a reversible process?

Savageduck
We are descending into silliness here. A reversible process is one where any changes made in the execution of that process can be reversed to revert to the original state.

Eric Stevens
A non-destructive work flow does not make a process reversible. All it does is let you have another go at a process using different settings.

Savageduck
Once that working copy has had USM applied, the layers merged, and compressed into a JPEG (a destructive action) then Floyd is correct, the function can no longer be reversed. However, Floyd doesn't see the concept of the non-destructive workflow because he doesn't, or appears not to use one. He certainly isn't using what is available to those running either Lightroom or Photoshop CS6/CC/CC 2014, and ignores that some here have the ability to take advantage of a non-destructive, or "reversible" workflow because of the software tools installed on their computers.

Eric Stevens
Floyd wasn't even talking about it! He was talking about different sharpening algorithms.

Savageduck
Floyd specifically addressed high pass sharpening (HPS) in response to Alfred's query regarding USM. We ended up discussing HPS & USM and the qualities of both. I know what Floyd was talking about.

Eric Stevens
Then why are you rabitting on about non-destructive work flows?

Savageduck
Because there is more to this thread, and NG than the arcane pontificating of Floyd D, and more over he, or anybody else here doesnÂ’t control the flow and drift of any thread.

Eric Stevens
Floyd was trying to address the question raised by the OP. The arrival of nospam and then you on the scene confusing non-destructive editing with whether a process is reversible or not has brought all sensible discussion to a halt.

Savageduck
There is much more to post processing than FloydÂ’s way of doing things. Even though he denies the reality of the tools available to the Photoshop user.

Eric Stevens
I'm afraid it's not a turf war. What Floyd said was perfectly correct and fundamental. It's quite independent of the editing software.