Moose
Thanks for your points about Intellisharpen.
I agree that the instructions say that for the different Bicubic
options, but there was a quote from an Adobe representative that
"Smoother" was in fact the best way to reduce size. I have tried both
and I am not sure that I can tell the difference! But I use Smoother
for the size reduction in one step, then I use IS to make the image
just so. As I said, I try to keep the intervention to a minimum and
normally end up attenuating the IS effect to 30-40%.
Cheers
Chris
On 13 Mar 2005, at 08:08, Moose wrote:
> Interesting choice. I've never tried it, as ths PS instructions say:
>
> * Bilinear for a medium-quality method.
> * Bicubic for the slow but more precise method, resulting in the
> smoothest tonal gradations.
> * Bicubic Smoother when you're enlarging images.
> * Bicubic Sharper for reducing the size of an image. This method
> maintains the detail in a resampled image. It may, however,
> over-sharpen some areas of an image. In this case, try using
> Bicubic.
>
> So, I've never reduced with Bicubic Smoother. And I didn't like Bicubic
> Sharpener when I tried it. That was a few versions ago. Maybe I should
> take another look at it.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|