Sandman
Floyd gave an ignorant and misdirected answer based on his own limited knowledge and workflow in the area.

The OP asked about sharpening only. He had soft lenses and wanted to know whether there were different sharpening techniques that work better with different lenses.

Floyd answered with some Adobe bashing and some general "this is the sharpening method I like" reply, not anything related to combat the softness of different lenses using different methods of sharpening.

Eric Stevens
You can find this in Message-ID: <87bnqh1mby.fld@barrow.com>

Sandman
Floyd then says that "the high pass sharpen tool that is the inverse of blur" and that "They can use the exact same algorithm with different parameters. Using one and then the other virtually reverses the results"

And then adds this nugget: "UnSharpMask is not reversible"

Which is true - unless you use modern software that can reverse the effect of any image processing operation. Floyd doesn't use modern software, so to him, most image processing *is* irreversible, but for the OP, that's not the case. He could use any sharpening technique he likes and it would be fully reversible.

Eric Stevens
It is at that point that both you and nospam go off track. It's not fully reversible in the sense meant by Floyd.

We have already argued from here. I'm not going around again.