QUOTE (pom @ Nov 22 2005, 05:49 PM)
Jani, try the lens blur vs USM, same settings, close up people photo, compare the skin texture, the hair and primarily the eyelashes and eyebrows, all at 100%. It's an amazing difference, I always found USM to look blocky at 100%. The noise, though maybe slightly harsher, looks more like grain but far far tighter than film could ever go. For landscape stuff, using a slightly larger radius in SS lens blur seems to firm up the 'smushed' details such as grass and pebbles that USM doesn't quite make natural looking when trying to recover fine resolution blurred by the AA filter.
I never use the same radius with these two.
I've found that I often end up using SS at a radius around 1, sometimes even larger, while with USM, I stick to between 0.3 and 0.7. USM with a radius at or above 1 is usually awful on-screen. If I'm not printing large enlargements, I may increase these values, but the ratio between SS and USM seems to be about the same.
But thanks for the tip about going even larger on landscapes, I hadn't really dared to do that.