Google| Subject | Re: Is RGB to Lab lossy? - was(Re: Lenses and sharpening) |
| From | PeterN |
| Date | 10/13/2014 18:29 (10/13/2014 12:29) |
| Message-ID | <m1gukf029cm@news4.newsguy.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | nospam |
| Followups | nospam (4h & 12m) > PeterN |
On 10/13/2014 2:24 AM, nospam wrote:
nospamNever said you did. Indeed, your commengt totally ignored that potential
In article <m1fb3p01a50@news4.newsguy.com>, PeterN <peter@verizon.net> wrote:nospamPeterNPeterNnospam
The fact is that very little can be done in any plug-in that can't be done in PS.
completely false.
if that were the case, then there would be no need for plug-ins.
Bad logic. Some plug-ins allow for faster processing. Also, do learn to read, I said nothing about speeding up workflow.
take your own advice, do learn to read. i didn't say anything about speeding up workflow at all.
YOur comments about LAB do support your statement.nospamPeterNPeterNnospam
Almost anything can be done in both RGB & LAB. LAB is a lot easie, and faster for some processes.
very few and not without a cost.
You just don't know how to use lAB, and won't admit that.
i've forgotten more about lab that you'll ever know.
I do not see a rational reason why I should have to use one. I had eliminated Painter from my workflow, and missed the upgrade window.nospamPeterNPeterNnospam
that gives more flexability, which is a good thing. Getting into a tool war, is meaningless, unless there is a reasonable accurate description of what eah plug-in does.
Habing said that, I am annoyed that the oil paint filter was removed from CC 2014.
third party opportunity.
Yup
then why are you annoyed?
-- PeterN
09/13/2014-
