Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 10/01/2014 21:39 (10/01/2014 15:39) |
| Message-ID | <011020141539099420%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | PeterN |
| Followups | PeterN (6m) |
In article <m0h4bq02pi4@news1.newsguy.com>, PeterN <peter@verizon.net> wrote:
you're not the final arbiter of what is true or not.PeterNPeterNnospam
Absent such proof I trust Dan Margulies's opinion, more than yours. p\Peroid.
dan marguilis is wrong. period.
the link you keep referring to proves he is wrong, which means you didn't read it.
it also means you are wrong (no surprise there) and you once again demonstrate how much of a blithering idiot you are.
I would have to be one to accept your "proof."
the fact is that rgb->lab->rgb is a lossy operation. period.
mathematics is not going to change because you have not accepted the proof, one of which was in the link you refuse to read.
09/13/2014-
