I'd forgotten the details, Moose, but now that you bring it up . . . it
might just be that Fred still runs that very old ad for the first series of
IS tools he offered. Remember the one with the cactus tree? It is this
version (these versions) I referred to re 8-/16-bit.
Yes, the version of IS I own (v2.2) still switches your work back to 8-bit
unfortunately. If and when I upgrade to CS I'll undoubtedly grab his newer
stuff.
But 16-bit or no, his IS action works better than any other method I'm
aware of by such a wide margin that it's a steal for the price he asks.
At one time he ran deals like buy two get the third action free or
something similar. Could be that policy still holds. I don't know as I
haven't really visited his site for a year or so.
Yes, his actions show on the actions menu, which I always keep open and off
to the right with other stuff I use regularly. Just dump his software into
that directory
Tris
P.S. I see what you mean, now, Moose. On his site Fred has the current IS
Pro version listed v1.1, so for all I know that's what you have in hand and
if you get PS CS (v8) you'd be in business. If you _do_ have a current
version of IS I can't imagine why it wouldn't do great work for you,
though. Unless your eyesight is worse than mine! <g> I agree that the old
version of this actions (the first 8-bit public domain IS he offered) could
run hot and cold depending on the subject material, I've mentioned that.
But his newer IS software is a different animal. It seems to go through the
same steps but these have been refined. And your work will be sharpened
behind a couple of different masks two separate times.
His first PD utility was _so subtle_ I often (as you claim to do) went back
to the PS luminance channel or even just "blasted" the poor little image in
frustration with the PS or PSP USM function. <g> But happily, those days
are gone. It's a good thing to actually try the countless different manual
methods at one's disposal in PS if for no other reason it helps to give the
users confidence and familiarity with this ultimately powerful package of
software. But after you've been there and done that a hundred times (at the
cost of untold hours spent into the early morning alone in front of the
monitor) it's kinda nice to let an action _intelligently_ do this chore for
you (with regard to edge sharpening). At least that's my view. The bottom
line for me is quality of the final image I want to use. I'm not clever
enough in PS to do manually all the various steps Miranda's actions
accomplish automatically. If I were I suppose I'd be the one running
fredmiranda.com. <g>
I notice he gets around $15 now for his IS. I think when I bought I paid
less than $10, but along with my eyesight my memory's not so good these
days, either.
Whatever, Fred's stuff actually works. When I look at plethora of "Auto
This!" standalone products running around out there these days (usually for
color balancing) for $50 and $100 and I wonder how these people sell
anything at all, or more to the point why Miranda hasn't sold (maybe he
has!) a couple million of his superior actions. (Of course the answer might
be as simple as Miranda's actions are only good for PS users, and I doubt
Adobe's market share is all that large given their price structure. Plus,
except for his site Miranda's ware is only advertised by word of mouth,
which in and of itself is not bad, but in this case quite limited to a
smallish group.)
At 11:57 PM 2/7/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>tristanjohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >A few years ago when I did all this stuff manually in PS I'd use channels
> >and probably make two passes at different settings, depending on the
> >image--just playing it by ear, really. Then I read about Miranda's work and
> >tried one of his first sharpening utilities (I believe it was 8-bit then
> >for the public-domain version). I soon discovered his technique was very
> >much more involved and sophisticated than what I'd been up to and simply
> >switched over. It wasn't perfect, though, and sometimes I'd go back to my
> >old ways if I didn't like the look. Nowadays the look is so good to my eye
> >that I'd feel like a chump to waste time trying to do Miranda better when I
> >know in fact that I cannot--and even if I could it would consume untold
> time.
> >
> >
>According to Fred's site, Intellisharpen Pro Plugin v1.1 works only with
>8 bit in PS 6, 7 and Elements, and 16 bit only with CS.
>
>Now you have me wondering if mine is the latest version. Do plug-ins
>show up as actions in the Actions window? Mine says v1.1 in line 2 after
>the copyright line. I have run into occasions where I didn't think his
>sharpener was as good as doing it myself, but I will try it out more.
>May have been on high speed film, and I see he has a special USM
>function for them now. Certainly the background noise difference is
>impressive in your example.
>
>Thanks for the work.
> Moose
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"
|