For doing some localized sharpening I have realized that I can perfectly use Studio 2 (which I wasn’t using, and which I got for free from Topaz because I previously got Studio Classic, coming from FXLab, and many of their now legacy plugins). Seems to work OK, but Topaz had in the past a tendency of repeating tools on their different plugins, which it seems they are now trying not to do, but somehow still keep doing. Nevertheless, this is not the reason for not going for it. It takes a lot of time to process the images in my computer. I also have and use Affinity Photo.īut regarding the Black Friday’s offer from Topaz, though very tempting, I think I’ll pass, so I won’t be getting neither Sharp AI nor Denoise AI. If I do the opposite with the sliders of the Unsharp Mask, I prefer doing so working in LAB mode in the Luminosity channel (not to affect colour).Īnd thanks Tilltheendofeternity (that was hard to write ) for your input. I think I tend to use more contrast (of whichever kind) to sharpen most of the time, as even when I use the Unsharp Mask on a tiff file I usually set the sliders differently than most commonly used, I tend to set them with a low Amount and a higher Radius, which I believe (though might be mistaken) rises contrast (even to colour but in a subtle way) in a manner that increases a perception of sharpness. Thank you Joanna and yes, I have been using micro-contrast as it works fine. I have stopped using the sharpening feature with DxO’s Local Adjustments. Much more than when for example doing a conventional sharpening (using Unsharp Mask) to a tiff file after having developed my raw file (for which purpose of doing it locally, I can use masks). Local adjustments are great (in general), but it is my impression that “sharpening” within local adjustments generates noise (or are they artifacts?) even if the areas of the raw file to which I apply the sharpening are highlights. I like and am very happy with the program (obviously, because if not I wouldn’t have been using DxO’s for so many years and wouldn’t have updated to a newer version), but I have noticed something that I think ought to be improved (or I would like to see being improved) in future versions of the program to come (or maybe I might be mistaken and/or doing something wrong). I have updated from Optics Pro x9 (having previously been through versions x7 and x8) to PhotoLab 3, just before PL 4 was released.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |