Hi, Alberto
I have some questions regarding “Capture Sharpening” in Ver.1.20.2 for proper translation.
I don’t think there has been any change in the algorithm for Capture Sharpening since “Sharpening” in Ver.1.20.1. What is your intent of changing the label in 1.20.2?
And I understand that only the “RL deconvolution” method of “Capture Sharpening” is equivalent to “Capture Sharpening” of RawTherapee. Is my understanding correct?
Well, if you are asking “what’s in a name?”, I don’t know how to answer that 
But yes, I only changed the label. I think it’s more accurate now, as it better reflects where in the pipeline that specific sharpening is applied. What algorithm is used is not so relevant imho
I think Japanese users are not used to the term of “Capture Sharpening”, and it is difficult to understand it for them. It may be same for French people, right? But we see the terms of “Diffraction compensation” or “Diffraction correction” in some Raw processors like of Nikon, Panasonic, Ricoh, or Capture One. And I think RT’s Capture Sharpening (with RL deconvolution algorism) is equivalent in algorism to these “Diffraction compensation” tools, so I wonder it may be better to translate “Capture Sharpening” into “Diffraction compensation” in Japanese for better understanding.
But “Capture Sharpening” in ART has multiple method…
I thought capture sharpening was a reasonably-established term in photography, sorry if it made more confusion. I take it to simply mean “sharpening applied early”. Similar to “output sharpening”, which also exists in art.
See e.g. Guide to Image Sharpening
FWIW, to me Capture Sharpening as a name is just explicitly starting what was implicit before: Sharpening (relatively) earlier in the pipeline, i.e., during editing, rather than sharpening applied to the output image.
On a related note, I definitely like the way ART shows the result of Output Sharpening in the preview. IIRC RawTherapee does not.
Thanks.
So you mean, in Ver. 1.20.2, “Sharpening” has been moved to earlier stage in processing pipeline (before Demosaicing?) and renamed, right?
No, just renamed.
Edit: note that also texture boost was renamed to texture boost/Sharpening. Having two different tools called “sharpening” seemed weird, so I added the “capture” qualifier to denote it’s applied earlier, that’s all.
Presharpening?
Thank you. It has been all clear.
I’m struggling as well to translate Capture sharpening into Dutch. I was thinking about “Initial sharpening”, so we’re quite close Claes.
The term Capture sharpening translates in Dutch literally in “Opnameverscherping” which equals “photo sharpening”, which is a kind of a non-word. The German translator uses “Eingangsschärfung”, something like “entry sharpening”.
In English the terms capture sharpening and output sharpening are apparently well known, as Albertos article shows.
But in Dutch… I’m still struggling to find a good translation.
And Dutch!
How about “early sharpening”? Does that work better? (For the translation I mean, the English I think is fine as is)
Voorverscherping?
Mvg
Claes in Lund, Zweden
Took the term from RT. I don’t have any other german references.
Or one could just use Sharpening 1 and Sharpening 2. 
But then you’d still need to differentiate them at some point.
Yes, I think it would be just as good as “Eingangsschärfung.”
However, I would have concerns about the term “capture sharpening”. Looking at ARTs pipeline, it doesn’t look that early in there, while afaik RTs CS is right after demosaicing? And couldn’t the naming confuse people into thinking that the functions are (technically?) the same?
The word “capture” refers to the captured data, sharpening that is about mitigating capture artifacts. Thinking about its purpose might help in picking a suitable adjective.
I already picked an adjective. I explained the rationale, and pointed out at common uses that are consistent with such choice. What’s more to debeate about it? If you don’t like it I’m sorry, but it’s not my problem unless the term is somehow offensive to someone. If it is, please provide some evidence of this and I’ll change it immediately. Otherwise, please just drop this, thanks!