Hi Bart
Thought I should actually print and compare
My crop of your image brought into CS6 and a duplicate of the background image made to serve as a sharpening layer. Smart sharpen Lens blur used to get as close to the PR result as possible.
I printed out the 10x 300 ppi crop PR and LR side by side. Only printer available to me at this time a cheap (but far from nasty) Canon A4. Having no suitable Canon paper I used HP semi gloss, and because I do not try and use this printer for colour critical work it uses third party inks. Set for highest quality and through CS6 I let printer manage colour at Canons own semi gloss paper settings.
Scanned at 300 dpi using Epson v500 with all sharpening etc turned off.
FWIW attached is the full size scan of the print further cropped to file size acceptable by the forum.
My impressions viewing the original – just in case my attachment does not appear as it should (EDIT:had to link to Photobucket as I think exceeded forum size limits):
The original image if resized 10x and printed at 300ppi becomes 46.6” x 58.17”
Accepting a ‘normal’ viewing distance of 1.5x print diagonal gives a distance from print of 9’. I can see no difference at this range.
At around 3’ I can see some differences. In fact the PS version appears to be marginally better at resolving detail in the figures and carvings with no discernible difference to the curved, horizontal or diagonals.
At 12” the differences more apparent. PR7 shows improvement in edge sharpness without introducing jaggies that are more apparent in the PS sharpened version. But IMHO loses out in the ability to retain detail again particularly apparent in the carvings although not exactly sharp the impression remains of more detail.
My thoughts/conclusions:
I had a yardstick to measure against and produce an image as close as I could to the PR7 using the suggested settings.
I think it is difficult to do a really fair comparison between the products. Using the PR settings that you provided for the 3x image on the 10x version yielded sharper edges but loss of image detail therefore would need to be toned down a little IMO in an attempt to recover that detail if that was the important criteria for this particular image.
My editing tool of choice for this type of work is PS and cannot think of a way to match the sharpening effect in this particular PR7 example in LR alone.
Of course the PR version could also be massaged in many ways within another editing or sharpening application.
I think it would take many tests with wildly varying image content to try and come to any valid generalisation about the relative merits of one vs the other and I strongly suspect that the conclusion likely to be that image content plays a vital role as does the individuals idea of what constitutes ‘best’ image quality
EDIT: Note this image has been scaled by Photobucket but is reasonable representation