Skip to main content
news

Re: Lenses and sharpening

nospam
SubjectRe: Lenses and sharpening
Fromnospam
Date09/21/2014 02:38 (09/20/2014 20:38)
Message-ID<200920142038299041%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
FollowsPeterN
FollowupsPeterN (18h & 12m) > nospam

In article <lvl62202o8m@news6.newsguy.com>, PeterN <peter@verizon.net> wrote:

PeterN
But you sould know that nosense knows much more than Dan Margulies.

nospam
i do, as do most people, but that's not the point.

read the thread before you say more stupid stuff.

chris murphy and andrew rodney in that thread pointed out dan margulis' errors, and many, many other people do so in other venues. dan is often wrong.

PeterN
And your documents to prove hime wrong are:

nospam
in the above link. duh. are you that stupid?

there are other references, but that one will suffice.

PeterN
It so happens that I often switch between LAB and RGB, and have never see a loss.

nospam
just because you can't see a difference doesn't mean there isn't a difference.

there's no visible loss with jpg at its highest setting, so according to you, jpeg is lossless.

idiot.

PeterN
talking to yourself again. I ask for proof and you call me names. There is an obvious conclusion to be draw.

nospam
the obvious conclusion is that you are a blithering idiot.

the proof is in the link and has already been pointed out more than once. it's a simple thing to do. have you done it? no. instead, you spew nonsense, demonstrating just how much of an idiot you are.

PeterN
You made a statement, I asked for proof, and you trun to pejoratives.

proof was provided.

if you aren't going to bother reading it (even before you asked) and doing what it describes, then my response is very appropriate and not pejorative at all.

PeterN (18h & 12m) > nospam