Can anyone help explaining the purpose of unmasking a picture? What is the different between sharpening and unmasking a picture?
spark Member 60 posts Joined Dec 2002 More info | Apr 19, 2003 08:31 | #1 Can anyone help explaining the purpose of unmasking a picture? What is the different between sharpening and unmasking a picture?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Marley Member 133 posts Joined Jan 2003 More info | Apr 19, 2003 08:41 | #2 Do you mean the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 19, 2003 09:10 | #3 marley wrote: Do you mean the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop? I read that in the "old days" they use to "Unsharp Mask" pictures by shooting a picture with a sheet of glass over it to enhance the sharpness. Although the name is confusing Unsharp Mask will make your pictures sharper. not Unsharper.... lol.. However if comparing to sharpness?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
lziering Member 148 posts Joined Nov 2002 More info | Apr 19, 2003 10:06 | #4 Unsharp mask is the way most Photoshop users sharpen an image. It allows so much flexibility and control you could fill a book or two with just how to use it. My suggestion is that you try one of two techniques.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
chrismaddock Senior Member 307 posts Joined Mar 2002 Location: Southampton, UK More info | Apr 19, 2003 13:24 | #5 marley wrote: Do you mean the Unsharp Mask in Photoshop? I read that in the "old days" they use to "Unsharp Mask" pictures by shooting a picture with a sheet of glass over it to enhance the sharpness. Actually, what they did was to sandwich the negative with a slightly out of focus copy (the unsharp mask) in the enlarger. Chris Maddock
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 19, 2003 18:34 | #6 Thanks guys for the wonderful points. At the same time anyone tried using the ACDsee to carry out the unmasking?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
lziering Member 148 posts Joined Nov 2002 More info | Apr 20, 2003 09:06 | #7 I've never heard anyone other than you use this term "unmasking". If you mean using the sharpening adjustment in ACR, yes, I've used it. It works well and is probably best used to add just a small amount of sharpness to images before opening them in Photoshop. I'd suggest a value between 25 and 50.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 20, 2003 09:49 | #8 Ok is unsharp Mask... hope that Satisfy U...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
robertwgross Cream of the Crop 9,462 posts Likes: 3 Joined Nov 2002 Location: California More info | Apr 20, 2003 09:50 | #9 lziering wrote: Stop calling it "unmasking"; no one is going to know what you are talking about!!! Let me guess. Have you been reading this entire thread?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 20, 2003 09:53 | #10 Is ok Bob....thanks!
LOG IN TO REPLY |
lziering Member 148 posts Joined Nov 2002 More info | Apr 20, 2003 21:02 | #11 robertwgross wrote: lziering wrote: Stop calling it "unmasking"; no one is going to know what you are talking about!!! Let me guess. Have you been reading this entire thread? Let me guess. You didn't read Sparks post that was just above mine that asked again about "unmasking". Maybe you could tell me more about the "standard tool" called "unmask. I've only heard of a filter called "unsharp mask". It's always such a pleasure to read you posts, Bob. Still trying to convince yourself that the body on your D60 is better than a $300 Rebel?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
robertwgross Cream of the Crop 9,462 posts Likes: 3 Joined Nov 2002 Location: California More info | Apr 20, 2003 23:35 | #12 lziering wrote: It's always such a pleasure to read you posts, Bob. Still trying to convince yourself that the body on your D60 is better than a $300 Rebel? No, I don't have to convince myself. That was done long ago. The previous discussion was that somebody had contended that the D60 body was built on a Rebel body. Of course, as many people know, that is utter hogwash. As I sit them side by side, there is very little comparison in physical size, weight, top display or most features.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Apr 21, 2003 08:50 | #13 robertwgross wrote: lziering wrote: It's always such a pleasure to read you posts, Bob. Still trying to convince yourself that the body on your D60 is better than a $300 Rebel? No, I don't have to convince myself. That was done long ago. The previous discussion was that somebody had contended that the D60 body was built on a Rebel body. Of course, as many people know, that is utter hogwash. As I sit them side by side, there is very little comparison in physical size, weight, top display or most features. Hi Bob, don’t worry about the responses, because certain people just like to argue and comment to ensure “winningâ€. Anyway this forum is created to help (which is forgotten because of his ignorance) and not to pin point and go on and on and then sleepless nights thinking how to go on with the next war….. So Bob let’s do something better than with some …..
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is AlainPre 1766 guests, 154 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||