Mark (or anyone else), Do you know of a good reference (or could you explain) how these three properties in the unsharp mask work. I've made some guesses based on experimentation, but I'd like to be sure I'm doing it right.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/08/04 08:30PM >>> "JosteinPx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You guys know a lot more about these things than I do, but I can't help but >thinking that since the *istD is softer than other 6 Mpx cameras, and even >softer than other cameras using the same chip, there must be some >differences around. Do we know fer sure that there's _one_ optimal degree of >softening for a given CCD, and that all the camera makers adhere? No. >Or could it be that Pentax simply put on a slightly too soft filter? All the reports I've seen indicate than, rather than put in "more softening" (a lower frequency anti-aliasing filter, in other words), Pentax has just applies less sharpening in camera. Experienced Photoshop users like myself wouldn't have it any other way. I want the camera to do no image sharpening at all. The *correct* sharpening for any given image requires adjustment of amount, threshold and radius and all three factors vary independently of each other, depending on the subject matter of the photo. Current DSLR's allow you some control of amount, but not the other two variables; they're fixed forever in the camera's firmware. Since I can't have control of all three variables in camera, I want the camera to do no sharpening at all. I'll take care of it myself. Incidentally, I think it would be useless to actually let the user control all three aspects of sharpening in the camera: There's no way to judge accurately from the tiny LCD on the back of the camera and there are more than enough things for a photographer to be concerned with during a shoot anyway. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
