Perhaps I haven't read the Topaz documentation in sufficient detail, but from what I have seen they have done a poor job of differentiating 'Detail' from 'InFocus' and where one should use each tool. It seems to me that one would use InFocus primarily for capture sharpening and Detail for creative sharpening.
Hi Bill,
That's correct.
However, Detail also has a 'Deblur' control, which is basically a much simplified control version of deconvolution (Capture) sharpening. But for Capture sharpening in particular, their InFocus plugin offers much more possibilities. 'Detail' on the other hand excels in modifying structural detail, which can come across as sharpening, but it isn't, it's Creative 'sharpening'. It does not do that by modifying acutance or edge-contrast, but rather by modifying the amplitude of certain spatial detail 'sizes' (frequencies).
I also use FocusMagic for it's excellent deconvolution quality with low risk of artifacts, as Capture sharpening tool, also because it really restores resolution. Sometimes I prefer the biting sharpness of InFocus, but that depends on the subject.
Detail is so good in bringing out surface detail and structure, that it's hard to beat with any other tool. It can also be used for output sharpening, after resampling to 600 or 720 PPI, although I sometimes also use FocusMagic for part of that (reclaiming a bit of resolution after upsampling to more than the file offers natively).
Cheers,
Bart