Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
From | Savageduck |
Date | 09/18/2014 16:52 (09/18/2014 07:52) |
Message-ID | <2014091807525654395-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Eric Stevens |
Followups | android (2h & 14m) Eric Stevens (7h & 5m) > Savageduck |
Eric StevensHoly spluttering wake up call!! Eric, just take a look at what you have written and tell me you aren’t grasping at straws?
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:32:17 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckEric Stevens
On 2014-09-18 04:17:59 +0000, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) said:Floyd L. DavidsonSavageduck
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckFloyd L. Davidson
On 2014-09-18 01:00:46 +0000, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>said:Eric StevensSavageduck
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 06:05:14 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckEric Stevens
On 2014-09-17 09:22:00 +0000, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>said:Eric Stevens
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:27:43 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:Savageduck
On 2014-09-17 04:08:19 +0000, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>said:Eric Stevens
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 07:53:15 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:Savageduck
On 2014-09-16 10:36:29 +0000, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) said:
--- snip ---Eric StevensSavageduckSavageduckEric Stevens
The reverse process performed on a lossy, compressed JPEG is not going to reverse the HPF to return to the original state. That was lost once the save was executed.
That's why I never included a conversion to JPG in my example of a reversible process.
Â...but that genius Floyd did.
--- snip ---Eric StevensNo one who understood what we were trying to talk about would claim that a JPG conversion is a reversible process.Savageduck
Â...but that genius Floyd did.
I've had a look and I cant see where. Could you refer me to the message?
With pleasure.
That wasnâEUR(Tm)t too tough to find: Posted: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 13:44:18 -0500 Message ID: <8738bs2076.fld@barrow.com>
Wherein Floyd stated the following:
âEURoeA non-destructive workflow means you can *undo* and then *redo*.
That is not a reversible function.
For example, you can add sharpening with a high pass sharpen tool to an image, save it as a JPEG, send it to someone else, and they can use a blur tool to reverse the sharpen.
If the sharpening is done with UnsharpMask that cannot be done. USM is not reversible.âEUR?
Note, the words, âEURoesave it as a JPEG,âEUR?.
As I said, that genius Floyd did.
So we now we know you can't read.
What I said was that *high pass sharpen is reversible*. It is, even if a few people are unable to either understand or accept that it is.
From a lossy, compressed JPEG? You did say “save it as a JPEG” didn’t you? Have you also developed the mathematics to reverse the compression and loss in that High-Pass sharpened file, so that you can return it to its original state?
HPS might well be reversible, but returning the file to its truly original state after being saved as a JPEG is improbable.
It's not the file that is being returned to the original state: it's the sharpening.
Actually, I am not replacing anything, and in an odd way I am not “reversing†the effect of any of those sharpening methods. I am readjusting the parameters, and in making that readjustment I can end up in any state, including the original so I can produce another version. In fact I am not even going to go through the pointless esoteric exercise of working on that saved JPEG, it will remain as a snapshot of the state of the working image file when it was saved.SavageduckEric Stevens
However, I have the tools to do that, with HSP, and even USM regardless of how much you stamp your feet and say I canÂ’t.
But you are not reversing it: you are reverting and replacing it. Not the same thing.