Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
From | nospam |
Date | 09/20/2014 04:06 (09/19/2014 22:06) |
Message-ID | <190920142206582088%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Eric Stevens |
Followups | Eric Stevens (1h & 25m) > nospam Floyd L. Davidson (2h & 16m) |
it is definitely reversible. that's the point of a non-destructive workflow.SandmanEric Stevens
I don't care how you think he "used" the term. A non-destructive workflow is a reversible process in every sense of the term.
I *know* how he used the term and I have already explained in detail. A non-destructive work flow is not a fully reversible process.
Say I have a bomb, and cause it to explode. If I then with superhuman speed capture all the escaping gases and stuff them back into the ruptured casing, and then slam the casing shut, I might be said to have fully reversed the process. (In fact, that would not be correct in thermodynamic terms).bombs are not a non-destructive process.
Say I have another bomb and after I have exploded the first bomb I put the second bomb in it's place. It might now look as if the first bomb had never explodedbut I have not reversed the changes to the first bomb: I have merely substituted for it.