Um..? Seems like folks here think USM sharpens images. Un-Sharp Mask, AFAICT,
does about the same thing as anti-aliasing does, only it does it at the ass end
of the the process. I think you can compare it to softening a portrait. You can
use a soft filter on the lens, or you can soften when enlarging. While the
effect is similar, they certainly do not give exactly the same results. The main
purpose of of USM is to minimize the shapening artifacts from over sharpening
the images. At least that is the way it works with my scans.
--
Jostein wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
And who is right??? ;-)
:-)
From a technical pov, it's always hard to argue with the real experts. I
remember that statement from last autumn, and I'm not going to dispute
anything...
Still, I find the *istD raw files lacking in sharpness, and I believe I know
how to use both the USM in photoshop, and the various sharpening tools
elsewhere.
For example, the I think PhaseOne C1 Pro gives me slightly sharper tiffs
than the raw converter in photoshop. An both are of course better than the
native Pentax thingy.
At the same time, I see users of other brands produce images with a
sharpness I am not able to get. Which frustrates me. :-(
cheers,
Jostein
--
graywolf
http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
