I know that sharpneing post conversion is conventional wisdom. But I've tried both ways with some images. In certain cases I've found that sharpening in the RAW converter yields a final image with better apparent sharpness and no artifacts than does applying USM after conversion. In other case, I've found that USM is superior. I frequently try both and make a decision after comparison. Sometimes, if I've sharpened a large file for printing, I'll add a bit more USM after downsizing for the web. However, in all cases, high magnification and careful examination of the final results are called for.
> On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:47 AM, william sawyer wrote: > > > As to the artifacts, I'm very interested in seeing how this plays > > out. I've > > noticed that images that look OK in one viewing program, may look > > like a > > snow storm in other program, due to sharpening junk. I sharpened > > this in > > the RAW converter to about 60%. I sharpened again in processing, > > don't > > recall the degree. > > Better to use sharpening after RAW conversion only, when you have > much more control over its operation. That explains some of the halo > and other other artifacts. > > Godfrey >
