Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 09/18/2014 09:05 (09/18/2014 03:05) |
| Message-ID | <180920140305569002%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Followups | Floyd L. Davidson (15m) > nospam |
In article <8738bpwhhe.fld@barrow.com>, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd@apaflo.com>wrote:
redone with different parameters. you can't even get that right.Floyd L. DavidsonnospamnospamEric Stevens
a non-destructive workflow doesn't 'destruct' so there's really nothing to 'undo'.
all of the adjustments are done en masse, with the item in question simply removed (or its parameters altered), which means it's never 'done'.
If it were never done, how come you think it can be undone?
it's not undone. it's redone with different parameters.
it's not a pixel level editor, it's a parametric editor.
do we have to go through the discussion about rendering again?
This is just so hilarious. In an article just previous to this nospam says,
"the fact is i can change anything without needing to redo the entire process.
floyd said the entire process would need to be redone. he's wrong."
Now he says "it's not undone. it's redone"
In a matter of minutes nospam lies, twists, turns, and lies again.there are no lies, twists nor turns.
you don't understand how a non-destructive workflow works or what it even means.
what i said is exactly correct.
it's a parametric editor. look it up and learn something for a change.
09/13/2014-
