Google| Subject | Re: Lenses and sharpening |
| From | Eric Stevens |
| Date | 2014-09-21 00:34 (2014-09-21 10:34) |
| Message-ID | <5jvr1a5q4qp3eau7r3qtpu4fn92evdf2e1@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (11h & 47m) > Eric Stevens |
On 20 Sep 2014 11:56:46 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:
SandmanI have catalogued a number of files in LR but have not worked on them. Here is the result of a quick search of a few of them. They have not been selected in any way.
In article <04lq1apqp3ju9qb8s0bged26jvdiuac5jq@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:SandmanEric StevensEric StevensSandman
That's true, but all the preview images I have looked at are between about 50% and 20% of the size of the original.
This is false.
It's not false, I can assure you. Have you looked at your own files?
Every single file you work with in LR has a 1:1 preview file.
Ref Original LR Cat Ratio
0410.JPG 2.94 MB 521 kB 17.7% 0222.JPG 5.26 MB 342 kB 15.4% 0412.JPG 2.64 MB 484 kB 18.3% 0251.NEF 14.6 MB 256 kB 1.7%
Once you look at the actual file sizes I think you will have to conclude that I am correct.SandmanEric StevensEric StevensSandman
They clearly can't contain as much data or be reconstructed to form a final export image.
Depends on whether or not you're exporting a full resolution image, Eric. Just as I said.
You are suggesting that files exported from LR are based on a degraded (i.e. downsized) version of the original file. I very much doubt that that is the case.
I have suggested no such thing, Eric. You would know that if you knew how to read and comprehend English.
How do your image sizes compare? --Eric StevensEric StevensSandman
In otherwords, what you have in these files is not an edited version of the original image.
Incorrect. Otherwise they wouldn't be previews.
They are an edited version of a downsized copy of the original files.--- snip ---Sandman
Run away, Eric. facts scare you, I know.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
2014-09-13-
