[filmscanners] Re: PS sharpening

["Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>]

I normally USM on the initial image, then after each downsampling, except
possibly for the last (depending on how large a step the last downsampling
is, the result may or may not look better with a final USM).

One of these days I'll have to try to do some controlled experiments to see
if the multiple-step process is provably superior to a single-step process.
I think there is probably a single-step equivalent, in any case, but it
might require more careful setting of USM parameters and they might have to
be set individually for each image.

----- Original Message -----
From: <al@greenspace.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <anthony@atkielski.com>
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 00:16
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: PS sharpening


Julian Vrieslander wrote:

> Then I started with the same original scan and downsampled in three steps,
> halving resolution at each step, with bicubic.  After the first two
> reductions, I applied unsharp mask, using Anthony's suggested settings.


Maybe I misunderstood Anthony but I thought the (over) sharpening was meant
to be applied
BEFORE the downsampling to ensure that some elements of the exaggerated
detail made it
into the reduced image.



Al Bond

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body