The thing is, it depends on the image, the look and of corse it's all so subjective.
Even shooting on a P65+ with a 120mm at f11 on a Blad I still use sharpening to some degree to massage/enhance the detail. Although it's much less than what I'd push it to on a Canon, but just because there is alot more detail there doesn't mean it should, or you have to leave it alone.
I do believe that every image requires some kind of sharpening and particularly so when printing with certain outputs or resizing.
Offset printing requires more sharpening than what is considered normal, that is what I was trying to get to terms with here. It's hard to judge with the monitors that we use and it was brushed on in the post here recently about softproofing.
Unfortunately extensive proofing is becoming harder to get clients to spring for, especially wet proofs are way too expensive for magazine productions. It litearlly means stopping the press while the proofs are evaluated and it costs big bickies. On top of all that, shooting 5 days a week makes it difficult to keep it all in check so I'm looking for some kind of ball parkformula, which in theory could exist - I'm guessing some people out there have some kind of formula that works for them - ie. get it to how you want it to look and then add 30% with a radius of 1...or something, hence the post.
