Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Rawzor beta release (lossless raw compression)

Reply
Thread Tools

Rawzor beta release (lossless raw compression)

 
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>>> "The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff
>>>>>>> among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. " -Wikipedia.
>>>>>> Nothing like selective, and out-of-context, quotes to support your
>>>>>> case.
>>>>> Nothing like a strongly snipped rebuttal and suggestion of mis-direction
>>>>> to support yours. Which fails (as usual).
>>>>>
>>>>> The cute thing is guys like you with AA'd cameras defending them as
>>>>> perfectly sharp
>>>> And now you're reduced to lying your slimy ass off about what I wrte.
>>>>
>>>> Typical dumbshit ideologue.
>>> Oh Ray. Face the truth.

>>
>> I did. You're a liar.

>
>I certainly am not.


The proof is above, asshole. You made a claim about me that is
transparently untrue. That makes you a liar.

--
Ray Fischer
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Paul Furman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2008
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Sachin Garg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Alan, as long as you are using Adobe products (which are great BTW) you will
>> be fine as all the information that Adobe products can use is transferred to
>> DNG.

>
> So what happens when one does not want to buy Adobe's products?
> Is there not a vendor lock-in trap waiting to happen?


No, dng should be the first format that other converters keep up to date.


>> My understanding of Adobe's purpose for creating DNG is reducing their own
>> (and all software developers) pain when supporting all these large number of
>> raw formats



--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2008
Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:


>> So what happens when one does not want to buy Adobe's products?
>> Is there not a vendor lock-in trap waiting to happen?


> No, dng should be the first format that other converters keep up to date.


Because it's a really easy format to completely support?

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2008
Ray Fischer <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>Ray Fischer <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>> Here's the deal. You have a sensor on a chip surrounded by non-sensor
>>> stuff. You want to get all of the light in the non-sensor area into
>>> the sensor. That's the job of the AA filter.


>>Wrong. That'd be microlenses, which do a completely different job.


> Is there some reason why microlenses don't do anti-aliasing?


Yes, they collect light into exactly one pixel, not spreading it
over more than one.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Wolfgang Weisselberg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Wolfgang Weisselberg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>Ray Fischer <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>>>> Here's the deal. You have a sensor on a chip surrounded by non-sensor
>>>> stuff. You want to get all of the light in the non-sensor area into
>>>> the sensor. That's the job of the AA filter.

>
>>>Wrong. That'd be microlenses, which do a completely different job.

>
>> Is there some reason why microlenses don't do anti-aliasing?

>
>Yes, they collect light into exactly one pixel, not spreading it
>over more than one.


You're confusing "anti-aliasing" with "blurring".

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff
>>>>>>>>> among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. " -Wikipedia.
>>>>>>>> Nothing like selective, and out-of-context, quotes to support your
>>>>>>>> case.
>>>>>>> Nothing like a strongly snipped rebuttal and suggestion of mis-direction
>>>>>>> to support yours. Which fails (as usual).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The cute thing is guys like you with AA'd cameras defending them as
>>>>>>> perfectly sharp
>>>>>> And now you're reduced to lying your slimy ass off about what I wrte.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Typical dumbshit ideologue.
>>>>> Oh Ray. Face the truth.
>>>> I did. You're a liar.
>>> I certainly am not.

>>
>> The proof is above, asshole. You made a claim about me that is
>> transparently untrue. That makes you a liar.

>
>You've been defending AA as not causing loss of sharpness,


You lied about what I wrote.

> that being
>true, then the statement I said above is a reasonable assumption.


No, I never made any claim about any camera being "perfectly sharp".
That's a complete fabrication of yours.

> If
>wrong it makes me bad at assumptions, but not a liar.


You made a statement which is objectively false. If you're not a liar
then you're an illiterate moron.

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>
>> You made a statement which is objectively false. If you're not a liar
>> then you're an illiterate moron.

>
>Tsk, tsk. What this comes down to really, is that having completely
>lost your argument about AA filters, you resort to ah-hominem attacks.


And now you're adding on another lie. You lied wbout what wrote and now,
embarrassed by your own lack of morals, you delete all of the evidence and
declare victory.

What a chickenshit little asshaole.

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff
>>>>>>>>> among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. " -Wikipedia.
>>>>>>>> Nothing like selective, and out-of-context, quotes to support your
>>>>>>>> case.
>>>>>>> Nothing like a strongly snipped rebuttal and suggestion of mis-direction
>>>>>>> to support yours. Which fails (as usual).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The cute thing is guys like you with AA'd cameras defending them as
>>>>>>> perfectly sharp
>>>>>> And now you're reduced to lying your slimy ass off about what I wrte.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Typical dumbshit ideologue.
>>>>> Oh Ray. Face the truth.
>>>> I did. You're a liar.
>>> I certainly am not.

>>
>> The proof is above, asshole. You made a claim about me that is
>> transparently untrue. That makes you a liar.

>
>By the way, per definition, it's only a "lie" if it is intentionally so.
> It certainly wasn't and I'm certainly not.


So you're really just an lliterate dumbshit who doesn't read.

Great defense there, asshole.

>So, back to subject. AA filters soften images.


But you're a dumbshit so why should anybody believe you?

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>> You made a statement which is objectively false. If you're not a liar
>>>> then you're an illiterate moron.
>>> Tsk, tsk. What this comes down to really, is that having completely
>>> lost your argument about AA filters, you resort to ah-hominem attacks.

>>
>> And now you're adding on another lie. You lied wbout what wrote and now,
>> embarrassed by your own lack of morals, you delete all of the evidence and
>> declare victory.
>>
>> What a chickenshit little asshaole.

>
>Bluff and blunder will get you nowhere little minded Ray.


Telling the truth is "bluff and blunder" in your world?

>AA cannot be made perfect in a camera.


I never said otherwise, moron. Once again you show yourself too
eager to lie about what people write, even to the point of showing
yourself to be stupid.

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-07-2008
Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You made a statement which is objectively false. If you're not a liar
>>>>>> then you're an illiterate moron.
>>>>> Tsk, tsk. What this comes down to really, is that having completely
>>>>> lost your argument about AA filters, you resort to ah-hominem attacks.
>>>> And now you're adding on another lie. You lied wbout what wrote and now,
>>>> embarrassed by your own lack of morals, you delete all of the evidence and
>>>> declare victory.
>>>>
>>>> What a chickenshit little asshaole.
>>> Bluff and blunder will get you nowhere little minded Ray.

>>
>> Telling the truth is "bluff and blunder" in your world?
>>
>>> AA cannot be made perfect in a camera.

>>
>> I never said otherwise, moron. Once again you show yourself too
>> eager to lie about what people write, even to the point of showing
>> yourself to be stupid.

>
>You are pathetic. If you disagree, you start hurling insults.


You're an asshole. If you can't debate honestly then you start lying.
When you can't cope with people write then you make up a strawman to
attack.

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RAW Viewer for wide range of RAW formats greymfm Digital Photography 0 06-14-2006 09:12 PM
[Maxxum 7D] Dimage RAW Viewer v. Adobe Raw Plugin Alan Browne Digital Photography 3 03-12-2005 04:17 AM
Adobe PS RAW convertor vs Nikon RAW convertor Vlad Gunko Digital Photography 8 01-25-2005 07:43 PM
How raw is RAW format? Editor www.nutritionsoftware.org Digital Photography 4 12-22-2003 07:33 PM



Advertisments