nospam
a non-destructive workflow doesn't 'destruct' so there's really nothing to 'undo'.

all of the adjustments are done en masse, with the item in question simply removed (or its parameters altered), which means it's never 'done'.

Eric Stevens
If it were never done, how come you think it can be undone?

nospam
it's not undone. it's redone with different parameters.

it's not a pixel level editor, it's a parametric editor.

do we have to go through the discussion about rendering again?

Floyd L. Davidson
This is just so hilarious. In an article just previous to this nospam says,

"the fact is i can change anything without needing to redo the entire process.

floyd said the entire process would need to be redone. he's wrong."

Now he says "it's not undone. it's redone"

nospam
redone with different parameters. you can't even get that right.

Floyd L. Davidson
*Redone* is *redone*. Both when I use the word and when you use the word for the *exact same meaning*.

In a matter of minutes nospam lies, twists, turns, and lies again.

nospam
there are no lies, twists nor turns.

you don't understand how a non-destructive workflow works or what it even means.

what i said is exactly correct.

it's a parametric editor. look it up and learn something for a change.

Floyd L. Davidson
Off topic discussion... it has no significance about a discussion of the difference between a high pass sharpen and an unsharp mask sharpen.