Todd,
I have experimented with the radius setting. However, when I reduce the
radius enough to eliminate the halo, I do not get much sharpening. Also,
this white line (halo, if you will) does not occur everywhere - just certain
areas where a black boundary is net to a light area. At least it is not
noticeable in other areas of my images. I'll read your articles - thanks for
the links. Also, thanks to Les for his link.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------
respond to bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Flashner" <tflash@earthlink.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: NikSharpener Pro
> Isn't this "boundary" the halo that USM is built upon? The idea of USM
(and
> this is way to short an explanation) is to introduce just such edge
contrast
> around and/or between objects and transition zones. The width of these
halos
> are controlled by the Radius slider in the USM dialog box. Try decreasing
> your Radius substantially to see if that helps.
>
> Also check out these two articles:
>
>
>
>
>
> Todd
>
>
> > Brian,
> >
> > Honestly, it is too soon for me to answer than question. The scanning
I've
> > done with it so far has been low-res web scanning. I certainly haven't
> > noticed the boundary problems you described. I have not, however,
scanned
> > for printing at full resolution. Once I do that, I'll let post more
> > results. For the purpose I've used it so far, I've been very pleased.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >> Tom,
> >> I find your comments intriguing. Could I ask a few questions? I find
> >> that when I sharpen using Photoshop tools, there is oftentimes an
> > artificial
> >> dark or light line (sharpening artifact) that appears at the
juxtaposition
> >> or boundary of a dark and light area. This causes me to spend a good
deal
> > of
> >> time cleaning these things up. Does this this sharpening plugin
eliminate
> >> this problem? If it does I would say the price was worth it. I would be
> > most
> >> interested in your observations on this.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >
>
