Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Savageduck |
| Date | 09/16/2014 16:53 (09/16/2014 07:53) |
| Message-ID | <2014091607531553398-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Followups | Floyd L. Davidson (1h & 42m) > Savageduck Eric Stevens (13h & 15m) > Savageduck |
On 2014-09-16 10:36:29 +0000, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) said:
Floyd L. DavidsonI guess you are in complete denial with regard to the capabilities of current versions of Lightroom & Photoshop, so it doesn’t really matter what you want the correct terms would be. I will take “reversible†out of my obviously too hyperbolic for you, description of the capabilities of those Adobe products, and just continue to use the word Adobe uses, “non-destructiveâ€.
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckFloyd L. Davidson
So? The fact still remains, regardless of personal opinion about Adobe, Lightroom, & Photoshop, those using that software have the ability to maintain a fully non-destructive, and reversible workflow, that includes reversing the effects of any filter including USM.
It's not a "reversible" workflow. The correct terms would be either a non-linear undo, or simply that it can be reverted.
It seems that you have never worked with a truly non-destructive workflow, with Photoshop and Lightroom I have a totally reversible workflow which can deal with reverting crops, spot removal, content aware fill, content aware move, any of the various grad filters available, and filters, including the notorious USM.SavageduckFloyd L. Davidson
âEUR¦and if you are going to start that reverse mathematical operation from a compressed, & lossy JPEG, good luck getting back to where you started.
Your workflow, even if non-destructive, will be totally unable to deal with reverting any previous editing with the exception of processes, such as sharpen (not USM), that are reversible.
As I have said in some other responses of mine, the JPEG which might be produced is just a compressed, lossy snapshot of the actual, non-destructively adjusted, and uncompressed layered PSD, or TIF. It is best to consider it a version, and there is no point in even trying to rework it. Call it “version-1.jpgâ€. Once you are done with readjusting the layered PSD/TIF you can produce “version-2.jpgâ€, and still have the ability to return to the working PSD/TIF to produce a “version-3.jpgâ€.
The product of a non-destructive workflow is not a JPEG, and there is little point in doing any reversion work in those JPEGs other than some polishing tweaks.
Obviously there is nothing I can say or demonstrate to convince you that I am able to do what I say I can with LR &/or PS. You are stuck in a World void of Adobe where you spin your knowledge of fundamental technical minutia into a shield of denial. I will not be, nor do I strive to be the the technical wizard you obviously are, but this is one of those times where you have not moved with the times.
As I said when I first came into this thread, I fully expected you to tell me I was wrong and an ignoramus (which I might well be regarding some stuff), and you met that expectation, and there isn’t much point in going any further and we should just agree to disagree, you in your World, and me in mine.
-- Regards,
Savageduck
09/13/2014-
