Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Eric Stevens |
| Date | 09/17/2014 11:16 (09/17/2014 21:16) |
| Message-ID | <p9ki1a5t2urc3vp30n1rddb10l9fn0njaa@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | nospam |
| Followups | Sandman (15m) > Eric Stevens |
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 01:29:00 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
nospamSo you accept that you are not talking about the same thing that Floyd was talking about, and that you don't care. --
In article <sf2i1a1ai44fng06d14caf73520h0h9bd0@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:nospamEric StevensFloyd L. Davidsonnospam
That is a good move on your part. Start sticking with what Adobe calls it, and in the process use appropriate terms.
adobe didn't come up with the name. it's what everyone calls it, because it's non-destructive.
But that doesn't make the processes employed reversible.
who cares.
what matters is the results, not micromanaging every step of the way.
a non-destructive workflow is reversible. period.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
09/13/2014-
