Google| Subject | Re: Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP? |
| From | PeterN |
| Date | 04/18/2014 17:06 (04/18/2014 11:06) |
| Message-ID | <lirf2c017of@news6.newsguy.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | nospam (2h & 26m) > PeterN Eric Stevens (7h & 32m) > PeterN |
On 4/17/2014 8:32 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
Eric StevensWhile it's rare that one can be certain what he's referring to: my vote would be converting the image to LAB & back to RGB. Two or three quick keystrokes in each direction.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:15:50 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:nospamEric Stevens
In article <2gi0l99msbj34q772pfa1jr8slbbdls2i0@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:nospamEric StevensPeterNnospam
But since you like quick and dirty processing, why don't you use the many color curves in LAB. Ater all you can apply a curve into a channel in LAB and get far more precise results than you can in ACR.
i don't like working in lab and do not find any advantage whatsoever, both in results and workflow.
dan marguilis is one of the biggest proponents of the workflow, and after reading his book, i was very unimpressed. it all can be done in rgb just as easily and likely with better results because you skip two conversions (which are not lossless).
But doesn't the Adobe color engine work in Lab anyway?
internally, but that's not the same as making a conversion of the image twice.
What are the two conversions?
-- PeterN
04/05/2014-
