Google| Subject | Re: Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP? |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 04/08/2014 15:03 (04/08/2014 09:03) |
| Message-ID | <080420140903436898%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
In article <87ioqk5dws.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:
the article eric posted says roger used photoshop for *two* out of the three comparisons and also for the original preparation of the images prior to the tests. only one out of the three used something else.Floyd L. DavidsonEric StevensFloyd L. DavidsonnospamEric StevensFloyd L. Davidson
Clark Vision have published articles describing their tests with all these things using Photoshop. See for example http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration2/index.html>
Read it a little closer Eric, Roger Clark did not use PhotoShop for Richardson-Lucy Deconvolutional sharpening, he also didn't even mention the Wavelet sharpening that I have previously commented on.
read it closer yourself. what he *didn't* use was the gimp.
Nobody said he used GIMP. But Eric said he used Photoshop, which was not even close to true.
I did not say the article I cited described how he did all these things with photoshop. I said he has published 'articles' (note plural) and cited this one as an example.
"Clark Vision have published articles describing their tests with all these things using Photoshop. See for example"
The one example does not show what you said, and specifically says otherwise. The other articles that Roger Clark has published don't either.
you're once again, wrong and as usual, refuse to admit it.
..snip..
Or, one can do what Savageduck did, citing two images to demonstrate exactly the point that I made: most readers here (and specifically him) are completely unaware of the significant distinctions in how and how to use different sharpen tools or why there are different filters than "Smoother" and "Sharper" for Bicubic resampling in good software tools.what you miss is that people do *not* need to know about any of that to make good images.
what adobe has done with photoshop is simplify it so that non-geeks can use all of the various algorithms while retaining all of the geeky features for those who are geeks. there is no limitation in the app. it's all there for those who want it and usable for those who don't. that's what makes an app powerful.
04/05/2014-
