Whether as good as Miranda's IS plug-in I haven't a clue but PWP's
advanced sharpen function is not a shotgun approach. In addition to
much more precise controls for radius and amount it also contains a
histogram and slider controls that:
"...lets you perform selective sharpening by including only those
neighbor pixels in the computations that differ by more than a given
threshold amount from the pixel you are sharpening."
The histogram allows you to identify smooth color, edgeless areas such
as sky that should not be sharpened. You can also choose to sharpen
only luminance and leave the chrominance alone or to sharpen under
control of a mask.
For more detail go to: <http://www.dl-c.com/Temp/> and download the
"Advanced Sharpen" pdf white paper at the left side of the page.
Once again, I don't think it's better. Just a good deal at USD 90.
Chuck Norcutt
Woburn, Massachusetts, USA
Tris Schuler wrote:
> It isn't the image appearance as a whole that the test wants to address but
> the inherent deficiencies in the PWP shotgun approach (basically the same
> as everyone else's except for Miranda's PS action) to so-called
> edge-enhancement technology. It's because of this approach that the
> background noise I point out occurs.
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|