Google| Subject | Re: Is RGB to Lab lossy? - was(Re: Lenses and sharpening) |
| From | nospam |
| Date | 10/06/2014 03:05 (10/05/2014 21:05) |
| Message-ID | <051020142105216572%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | PeterN (46m) > nospam Eric Stevens (7h & 29m) > nospam |
In article <s7h13a1fccm418skpdorc8ea5jvm4gm40j@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:
straw man.Eric StevensEric Stevensnospam
I couldn't see the difference at all, but then I didn't want to push the screen with excessive brightness. Instead I relied on the subtraction and the histogram to find the differences, which were almost zero.
'almost zero' is not zero.
you are actually proving my point.Eric Stevensnospam
nospam has backed off considerably from his original views but I expect that won't stop him from trumpeting them again in the future.
i have *not* done any such thing. stop lying and twisting what i say.
i have *always* said it's not lossless and it is not.
There is nothing you do in image processing which is not lossless.
For some reason the conversion of RGB -->Lab has been particularly singled out for criticism in this respect.it's a bad workflow because what can be done with an rgb->lab-rgb conversion can be done *without* the conversion and with better results.
it's more lossy than not doing the conversions.nospamEric Stevens
this is a fact, no matter how much you or anyone else say otherwise.
It's as lossless as anything else you can do.
09/13/2014-
