Unsharp Mask

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004.

  1. Hi all,

    I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in Photoshop
    and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you are
    dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to translate
    their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.

    They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5, and a
    threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.

    I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I like
    to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4 megapixel
    source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.

    Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?

    Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and 'threshold'
    USM settings?

    Many thanks for any help.

    I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but it would
    be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test prints/time
    wasted.
    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Tony Guest

    No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and very
    generalized.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

    "BenOne©" <> wrote in message
    news:dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in

    Photoshop
    > and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you

    are
    > dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to

    translate
    > their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    >
    > They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5,

    and a
    > threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    >
    > I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I

    like
    > to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4

    megapixel
    > source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    >
    > Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    >
    > Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and

    'threshold'
    > USM settings?
    >
    > Many thanks for any help.
    >
    > I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but it

    would
    > be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test

    prints/time
    > wasted.
    > --
    > Ben Thomas
    > Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    > relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    > given nor endorsed by it.
    >
     
    Tony, Oct 19, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "BenOne©" <> wrote in message
    news:dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2...

    > Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and
    > 'threshold' USM settings?


    Yes, absolutely. As you note, if the image is going to be viewed in a form
    that allows every pixel to be visible, then a good radius is 1.5 (or much
    larger if you want a "dodging" rather than "sharpening" effect).

    If the image is very large and will be viewed reduced or printed on a
    high-res printer, use a proportionally larger radius.

    I like to set a high percentage in order to preview what details are going
    to be emphasized, and then turn it way down (like to 20%) for a more subtle
    effect in the finished picture.
     
    Michael A. Covington, Oct 19, 2004
    #3
  4. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Hunt Guest

    In article <dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2>, says...
    >
    >Hi all,
    >
    >I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in

    Photoshop
    >and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you are
    >dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to translate
    >their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    >
    >They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5, and

    a
    >threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    >
    >I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I

    like
    >to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4

    megapixel
    >source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    >
    >Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    >
    >Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and

    'threshold'
    >USM settings?
    >
    >Many thanks for any help.
    >
    >I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but it

    would
    >
    >be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test prints/

    time
    >wasted.
    >--
    >Ben Thomas
    >Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    >relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    >given nor endorsed by it.


    Ben,

    I'll direct you to a Photoshop book that covers sharpening images in good
    detail, Ben Wilmore's Adobe Photoshop CS (there are editions for other
    versions) Studio Techniques, Adobe Press. I'd also urge you to let your
    critical eye be your guide, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach to
    Sharpening. I work with files up to 5GB in PS and Sharpening can be very
    critical and worthwhile, but it's always on an image-by-image basis.

    Hunt
     
    Hunt, Oct 19, 2004
    #4
  5. "Tony" <> wrote:

    > No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    > observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and very
    > generalized.


    Really.

    Still, there are some ideas. You can use smaller radius settings (try 0.5 to
    0.7) and higher amount settings for digital images (although I presonally
    currently prefer lower amount settings: I don't like to see halos and I
    don't like it when USM makes the image seem a lot brighter). This is one of
    the great advantages of digital over film: the low noise means you have more
    flexibility in processing.

    Set the USM dialog view to 200% or 300%, point at a sky or smooth area, and
    bump up the threshold setting until the noise isn't aggravated. If you are
    using a consumer camera at any ISO or a dSLR at ISO 400 or over, try
    NeatImage or Noise Ninja as the first step.

    <rant in response to the quoted recommendations in the original note>
    JPEG artifacts that are aggravated by USM don't occur at the lowest
    compression (highest quality) settings. If you have JPEG artifacts that are
    visible (or visibly aggravated by sharpening) at 100% on the screen, you are
    using much too high a compression setting. JPEG losses at high quality
    consist of reduction in contrast in high contrast fine detail. If you have
    to use JPEG in the camera or during your workflow, only use the highest
    quality setting.
    </rant>

    FWIW, the Japanese bimonthly (A4 glossy color) landscape magazine really
    likes heavy unsharp masking. I'm nearsighted and tend to grain sniff, so I
    see the halos. But it really does help if you are viewing at 10 inches or
    more from the page, especially for tree branches/leaves that aren't against
    the sky, where there isn't much contrast to start with.

    Always archive an _UNSHARPENED_ version of your images. A year from now, you
    will have very different ideas of what you like in sharpening, and a year
    from then, your preferences will change again.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan

    > "BenOne©" <> wrote in message
    > news:dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in

    > Photoshop
    > > and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you

    > are
    > > dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to

    > translate
    > > their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    > >
    > > They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to

    1.5,
    > and a
    > > threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    > >
    > > I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but

    I
    > like
    > > to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4

    > megapixel
    > > source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    > >
    > > Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    > >
    > > Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and

    > 'threshold'
    > > USM settings?
    > >
    > > Many thanks for any help.
    > >
    > > I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but

    it
    > would
    > > be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test

    > prints/time
    > > wasted.
    > > --
    > > Ben Thomas
    > > Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    > > relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as

    neither
    > > given nor endorsed by it.
    > >

    >
    >
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 19, 2004
    #5
  6. Tony wrote:

    > No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    > observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and very
    > generalized.
    >


    The "starting points" almost seem like perfect settings if I don't resize my
    pictures to 600ppi but I don't think it's right to USM then resize.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #6
  7. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Tetractys Guest

    BenOne wrote:

    > Can someone recommend what USM settings
    > to use for such large files?


    <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-usm.shtml>

    > Is there a relationship between the image ppi
    > and the 'radius' and 'threshold' USM settings?


    Deke McClelland in "Photoshop 7 Bible: Pro Edition"
    recommends 0.1 of radius value for each 15 ppi of
    final image resolution, 25 to 50 percent sharpening
    value, and leaves the threshold value up to your
    experimentation. These are "start" values, and
    he also recommends playing with them until you
    like the results. Obviously, the lower the threshold
    value, the more of the image USM affects.
     
    Tetractys, Oct 19, 2004
    #7
  8. In article <dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2>, BenOne(C) <>
    wrote:

    > Hi all,
    >
    > I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in
    > Photoshop
    > and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you are
    > dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to translate
    > their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    >
    > They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5, and
    > a
    > threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    >
    > I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I
    > like
    > to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4
    > megapixel
    > source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    >
    > Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    >
    > Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and
    > 'threshold'
    > USM settings?
    >
    > Many thanks for any help.
    >
    > I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but it
    > would
    > be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test
    > prints/time
    > wasted.


    I don't think there's any general rule for use. My primary use for
    Unsharp Mask is to compensate for haze using a large radius and small
    amount. I've found that my camera's own sharpening is very well tuned
    to the CCD. Adding a 200%, 1.5 pixel sharpening to my photos would ruin
    them.

    Unsharp Mask can be used to boost the usable resolution of a dithered
    printer. It's tricky work and only experimentation will find the right
    amount. It varies by image type, image resolution, printer type,
    printer driver, and paper type. With modern drivers using smarter
    dithering algorithms and finer dithers, the gain from doing so much
    tedious tuning is becoming small.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Oct 19, 2004
    #8
  9. David J. Littleboy wrote:


    > <rant in response to the quoted recommendations in the original note>
    > JPEG artifacts that are aggravated by USM don't occur at the lowest
    > compression (highest quality) settings. If you have JPEG artifacts that are
    > visible (or visibly aggravated by sharpening) at 100% on the screen, you are
    > using much too high a compression setting. JPEG losses at high quality
    > consist of reduction in contrast in high contrast fine detail. If you have
    > to use JPEG in the camera or during your workflow, only use the highest
    > quality setting.
    > </rant>


    Unless you are me, and have a Kodak DX6490 with JPEG quality choice, and no
    other file formats to choose from.

    >
    > FWIW, the Japanese bimonthly (A4 glossy color) landscape magazine really
    > likes heavy unsharp masking. I'm nearsighted and tend to grain sniff, so I
    > see the halos. But it really does help if you are viewing at 10 inches or
    > more from the page, especially for tree branches/leaves that aren't against
    > the sky, where there isn't much contrast to start with.
    >
    > Always archive an _UNSHARPENED_ version of your images. A year from now, you
    > will have very different ideas of what you like in sharpening, and a year
    > from then, your preferences will change again.
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan


    Thanks for the tips David.


    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #9
  10. Hunt wrote:

    > I'll direct you to a Photoshop book that covers sharpening images in good
    > detail, Ben Wilmore's Adobe Photoshop CS (there are editions for other
    > versions) Studio Techniques, Adobe Press. I'd also urge you to let your
    > critical eye be your guide, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach to
    > Sharpening. I work with files up to 5GB in PS and Sharpening can be very
    > critical and worthwhile, but it's always on an image-by-image basis.
    >
    > Hunt
    >


    Thanks Hunt. I'll see if I can find that book.
    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #10
  11. BenOne© wrote:
    > Tony wrote:
    >
    >> No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    >> observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and
    >> very
    >> generalized.
    >>

    >
    > The "starting points" almost seem like perfect settings if I don't
    > resize my pictures to 600ppi but I don't think it's right to USM then
    > resize.
    >

    Why are you resizing your images to 600? Have you tested printing both
    for speed but importantly for accuracy that vs. 300, or even 240?

    --
    John McWilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Oct 19, 2004
    #11
  12. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Mark M Guest

    "Hunt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2>, says...
    > >
    > >Hi all,
    > >
    > >I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in

    > Photoshop
    > >and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you

    are
    > >dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to

    translate
    > >their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    > >
    > >They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5,

    and
    > a
    > >threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    > >
    > >I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I

    > like
    > >to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4

    > megapixel
    > >source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    > >
    > >Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    > >
    > >Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and

    > 'threshold'
    > >USM settings?
    > >
    > >Many thanks for any help.
    > >
    > >I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but

    it
    > would
    > >
    > >be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test

    prints/
    > time
    > >wasted.
    > >--
    > >Ben Thomas
    > >Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    > >relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    > >given nor endorsed by it.

    >
    > Ben,
    >
    > I'll direct you to a Photoshop book that covers sharpening images in good
    > detail, Ben Wilmore's Adobe Photoshop CS (there are editions for other
    > versions) Studio Techniques, Adobe Press. I'd also urge you to let your
    > critical eye be your guide, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach to
    > Sharpening. I work with files up to 5GB in PS and Sharpening can be very
    > critical and worthwhile, but it's always on an image-by-image basis.


    Yipe!
    What sort of image files are these that are **5GB** in size??
    I've never heard of an image file that large, unless you're including a pile
    of layers all saved within the file.
    What are you working on?
     
    Mark M, Oct 19, 2004
    #12
  13. John McWilliams wrote:

    > BenOne© wrote:
    >
    >> Tony wrote:
    >>
    >>> No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    >>> observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and
    >>> very
    >>> generalized.
    >>>

    >>
    >> The "starting points" almost seem like perfect settings if I don't
    >> resize my pictures to 600ppi but I don't think it's right to USM then
    >> resize.
    >>

    > Why are you resizing your images to 600? Have you tested printing both
    > for speed but importantly for accuracy that vs. 300, or even 240?
    >
    > --
    > John McWilliams


    I'm simply choosing to use Photoshop to resize the images to the printer
    driver's native resolution instead of letting the printer do the interpolation.

    I have not done side by side comparisons.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <6ub2lc.pvp.ln@192.168.11.2>, BenOne© <>
    wrote:

    > John McWilliams wrote:
    >
    > > BenOne© wrote:
    > >
    > >> Tony wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> No one can recommend a setting. IT will depend on the picture and on the
    > >>> observer. The recommendations you find are simply starting points and
    > >>> very
    > >>> generalized.
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >> The "starting points" almost seem like perfect settings if I don't
    > >> resize my pictures to 600ppi but I don't think it's right to USM then
    > >> resize.
    > >>

    > > Why are you resizing your images to 600? Have you tested printing both
    > > for speed but importantly for accuracy that vs. 300, or even 240?
    > >
    > > --
    > > John McWilliams

    >
    > I'm simply choosing to use Photoshop to resize the images to the printer
    > driver's native resolution instead of letting the printer do the
    > interpolation.
    >
    > I have not done side by side comparisons.


    Unless your printer has 24 bit per pixel color, that's entirely
    pointless.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Oct 19, 2004
    #14
  15. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    gsum Guest

    I see you have plenty of good advice concerning USM so this
    is just an aside. You don't need to re-size to 600 ppi (I assume you
    mean 200ppi at 8x10) as your printer cannot print at anything like
    that resolution. The printer simply throws away all the extra data.
    You will make life easier for yourself and will get better results
    if you print at, or slightly above, your printer's resolution. For a typical
    2880dpi printer this is about 180 to 200 ppi.

    Graham


    "BenOne©" <> wrote in message
    news:dgh1lc.7p5.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I've read a few magazine tutorials about the Unsharp Mask feature in

    Photoshop
    > and they obviously make some assumptions about the image resolution you

    are
    > dealing with, but they don't say what that resolution is or how to

    translate
    > their recommended settings to your file resolution/print size.
    >
    > They generally recommend an 'amount' of 150-200%, a 'radius' of 1 to 1.5,

    and a
    > threshold of up to three to reduce sharpening of jpeg artifacts.
    >
    > I think those recommendations are based on 3 or 4 megapixel images, but I

    like
    > to resize my pictures to 600ppi which is considerably more than the 4

    megapixel
    > source file my camera produces if I'm printing an 8x10.
    >
    > Can someone recommend what USM settings to use for such large files?
    >
    > Is there a relationship between the image ppi and the 'radius' and

    'threshold'
    > USM settings?
    >
    > Many thanks for any help.
    >
    > I have tried just playing with the settings to see what looks best, but it

    would
    > be nice to know some theory so I can cut down on the number of test

    prints/time
    > wasted.
    > --
    > Ben Thomas
    > Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    > relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    > given nor endorsed by it.
    >
     
    gsum, Oct 19, 2004
    #15
  16. gsum wrote:

    > I see you have plenty of good advice concerning USM so this
    > is just an aside. You don't need to re-size to 600 ppi (I assume you
    > mean 200ppi at 8x10) as your printer cannot print at anything like
    > that resolution. The printer simply throws away all the extra data.
    > You will make life easier for yourself and will get better results
    > if you print at, or slightly above, your printer's resolution. For a typical
    > 2880dpi printer this is about 180 to 200 ppi.


    Where did you get the 180 to 200 ppi figure from?

    My printer is a Canon i9950. The printer driver will resize my files to 600 ppi
    if I don't do it first.

    On the other hand, Epson printer drivers typically have a native resolution of
    360 or 720 ppi.

    The printers themselves will then print at much higher resolutions, because they
    have to blend the colours to get your colours. I think my Canon prints at
    4800x2400 dpi.

    --
    Ben Thomas
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=, Oct 19, 2004
    #16
  17. For consistancy my company uses NIC's Sharpening Pro Plug-in. It does the
    calculations. Works well. Also....find the subordinate channel and sharpen
    that. The subordinate channel is most often the one with the least contrast
    or details. Sharpen that. It will do interesting things. Hey! Its a whole
    chapter...you think I am going to give the details here? Try it.
     
    Gene Palmiter, Oct 20, 2004
    #17
  18. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Bryce Guest

    your canon prints at 4800 dpi?

    he he.


    "BenOne©" <> wrote in message
    news:f044lc.nck.ln@192.168.11.2...
    > gsum wrote:
    >
    > > I see you have plenty of good advice concerning USM so this
    > > is just an aside. You don't need to re-size to 600 ppi (I assume you
    > > mean 200ppi at 8x10) as your printer cannot print at anything like
    > > that resolution. The printer simply throws away all the extra data.
    > > You will make life easier for yourself and will get better results
    > > if you print at, or slightly above, your printer's resolution. For a

    typical
    > > 2880dpi printer this is about 180 to 200 ppi.

    >
    > Where did you get the 180 to 200 ppi figure from?
    >
    > My printer is a Canon i9950. The printer driver will resize my files to

    600 ppi
    > if I don't do it first.
    >
    > On the other hand, Epson printer drivers typically have a native

    resolution of
    > 360 or 720 ppi.
    >
    > The printers themselves will then print at much higher resolutions,

    because they
    > have to blend the colours to get your colours. I think my Canon prints at
    > 4800x2400 dpi.
    >
    > --
    > Ben Thomas
    > Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    > relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
    > given nor endorsed by it.
    >
     
    Bryce, Oct 20, 2004
    #18
  19. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Owamanga Guest

    On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:10:23 -0700, "Bryce"
    <> wrote:

    >your canon prints at 4800 dpi?
    >
    >he he.


    It does at 8 colors, 3 bits per pixel with some of them sharing the
    same physical space on the paper. Great for really fine line-art, not
    that useful for photos.

    --
    Owamanga!
     
    Owamanga, Oct 20, 2004
    #19
  20. =?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=

    Tetractys Guest

    Tetractys, Oct 20, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. FK

    PS 7 - Unsharp Mask Settings

    FK, Sep 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    809
    Flycaster
    Sep 5, 2003
  2. Paddler

    Using the unsharp mask in Nikon Capture 3.0

    Paddler, Oct 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    550
    MikeWhy
    Oct 14, 2003
  3. Onepercentf

    Unsharp mask settings

    Onepercentf, Jan 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    47
    Views:
    1,513
    Robert
    Jan 14, 2004
  4. Daniel Dravot

    Unsharp mask

    Daniel Dravot, Apr 4, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    453
    Mark Johnson
    Apr 5, 2004
  5. no
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    755
    Lionel
    Jun 17, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page