Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Date | 09/21/2014 09:30 (09/20/2014 23:30) |
| Message-ID | <87mw9tph15.fld@barrow.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Savageduck |
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:
SavageduckNot too great a choice on your part. Her job is to try explaining products to idiots who can't comprehend either the theory or the technology. It defines you.
On 2014-09-20 23:39:49 +0000, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>said:nospamSavageduck
In article <t03s1atqlub50ec92bu1u73pra4ettn4th@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:nospamEric StevensSandmanSandmanEric Stevens
Nothing in your reply makes image processing be the same as thermodynamics, Eric. You're blathering about things you know nothing about.
See http://tinyurl.com/mbrhs3e
You failed again. Are you jusyt wildly googling and hoping that something will support your incorrect claims? Seems that way.
"Maximum entropy method in image processing". Naah. That's got nothing to do with image processing, at least not in your limited range of knowledge. But I bet there are guys at Adobe who understand all this.
i bet there are guys (and gals) at adobe who understand that a non-destructive workflow is reversible and laugh at all the bullshit being spewed here.
Here is a gal at Adobe who understands the concept of a non-destructive workflow. <http://www.jkost.com/lightroom.html>
But she supports what Eric is saying, not what you claim. Hmmmm...
-- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
09/13/2014-
