Thanks, Ken, I should have asked for advice, but I just forged ahead . . .
Chris
> On 26 Nov 14, at 14:25, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Well, my Autumn shots (4 of them) were rejected for “Soft or lacking
>> definition”. Sigh!
>
> It's a catch-22 situation. They tell you to not use any sharpening,
> but if you don't add sharpening, you'll get dinged for this. Why?
> Because everybody else DOES sharpen. The key to survival, that I've
> found, is to sharpen to give pixel clarity, but with absolutely NO
> halos. If you have any halos of any sort, you should be pounded into
> dust. When in doubt, I sharpen to the point where I just barely see an
> artifact and back it off a bit. It's better to be on the soft side of
> sharp than have artifacts. If you have halos or sharpening artifacts,
> you will be put on their sh** list forever.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|