On 12/11/2013 6:31 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
> That should be devised by Bruce Fraser - one of the Pixel Geniuses along
> with Jeff Schewe - who is no longer with us.
Bruce Fraser was indeed a pixel genius, and his book, Image Sharpening, is
deeply useful and informative.
Nevertheless, he apparently did not have deconvolution algorithms available to
him. Certainly he didn't discuss them.
They work in a way inherently different than USM, and which I find superior in
most cases.
NeatImage has been my tool of choice for some time. It only does one pixel
width steps, so fine tuning the effect often
requires adjusting the opacity of layers. Topaz InFocus does fractional pixel
settings (whatever that may mean), so is
more finely adjustable for strength of effect. So far, it's not agreed with me,
but I hold it in reserve.
If you look into how USM works, adding contrast at edges, it's easy to see why
it can have negative effects, like halos.
Why it works as LCE is still a mystery to me, but it does.
No Angel Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|