Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file?

 
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/16/2011 6:03 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011 07:53:02 -0700 (PDT), David Dyer-Bennet
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, May 15, 2011 7:59:30 PM UTC-5, nospam wrote:
>>> In article<(E-Mail Removed)>, Mxsmanic
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>>>> Adobe long ago switched primary development to Windows, because more users
>>>> have Windows than Macs. They then port to Macs.
>>>
>>> totally false. where in the hell did you come up with that?

>>
>> I don't know how to check it (the only hope is if Adobe has made some
>> public statements). But I thought this has been common knowledge for
>> more than 5 years. I can't pin down the year when I heard the
>> switchover happened, I'm not good at pinning memories to exact
>> times.
>>
>> (It's perfectly possible it isn't actually true. I haven't made any
>> serious efforts to check up on it because, while I find it
>> mildly interesting, I don't actually care a whole lot. I'm surprised
>> to find somebody who hasn't heard it before.)

>
> My version of that is that Adobe (and possibly some others) write for
> what is in effect a virtual machine. They have emulators for the
> virtual machine which enable it to be installed on both Windows or
> Apple machines. Anything which Adobe writes is then compiled for the
> virtual machine. This is an intermediate code which can then be
> recompiled for the target platform. An analgous process is described
> in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiler and more particularly the
> diagram http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Compiler.svg
>
> If this is the process they use, and I would expect that it is, they
> are not writing for any particular machine other than their own
> virtual machine which runs the intermediate code. Both Windows and
> Apple come second. I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome and Android and a
> few other things, running on a number of different processors, are in
> there also.
>


I don't know about writing for a virtual machine, which I wouldn't
doubt. However, if you want to play and not just discuss try this link.
It can keep one busy for months.

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/photoshop/

As for me, I am busy playing with LAB color and seeing how far I can
push it without getting out of gamut tones on the conversion back to RGB.

--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/15/2011 5:30 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:
> nospam writes:
>
>> sure they have. they required vendors to include windows or they won't
>> get as good of a deal on pricing (or no deal). that's part of what got
>> them into trouble several years back.

>
> No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
> build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it, and Microsoft would
> happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that. Thousands of
> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems. Microsoft has
> no control over who builds PCs. Anyone can set up shop as a PC maker and can
> choose to install or not install OEM versions of Microsoft operating systems.
> Microsoft may offer incentives to pre-install Windows exclusively, but nobody
> is forced to accept those incentives, and it's possible to make money without
> them.


Indeed the MS marketing department used have tracks at their free by
invitation, events for system builders.
It was not very hard to get an invitation. Just tell MS you wanted to go
and you got your invitation.
I went to the launch of VS 2005 wearing a Linux cap. The MS folks were
all over me. They gave me a full version of VS2005, along with a site
license for MS Office professional, complete with development tools.




>
> Apple, on the other hand, controls everything. It's Apple's way or the
> highway. Nobody else builds compatible hardware, nobody else is allowed to
> install Apple's OS. That's orders of magnitude more restrictive than simply
> giving a price break for exclusivity. You can't be a Mac-compatible OEM at any
> price, period.
>
> The only reason Apple hasn't got into trouble is that it's such a small part
> of the market. It turns out that many people don't want to be in Apple's
> stranglehold, so they just buy PCs instead. Apple apparently would rather have
> a tiny minority of followers of Steve Jobs' peculiar religion than a much
> higher revenue. Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> what it wanted.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On May 17, 2:52*am, PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 5/15/2011 5:30 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> > nospam writes:

>
> >> sure they have. they required vendors to include windows or they won't
> >> get as good of a deal on pricing (or no deal). that's part of what got
> >> them into trouble several years back.

>
> > No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
> > build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it, and Microsoft would
> > happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that. Thousands of
> > companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems. Microsoft has
> > no control over who builds PCs. Anyone can set up shop as a PC maker and can
> > choose to install or not install OEM versions of Microsoft operating systems.
> > Microsoft may offer incentives to pre-install Windows exclusively, but nobody
> > is forced to accept those incentives, and it's possible to make money without
> > them.

>
> Indeed the MS marketing department used have tracks at their free by
> invitation, events for system builders.
> It was not very hard to get an invitation. Just tell MS you wanted to go
> and you got your invitation.
> I went to the launch of VS 2005 wearing a Linux cap. The MS folks were
> all over me. They gave me a full version of VS2005, along with a site
> license for MS Office professional, complete with development tools.
>
>
>
> > Apple, on the other hand, controls everything. It's Apple's way or the
> > highway. Nobody else builds compatible hardware,


Well they do I've often brought products not made by Apple that work
with my
Macs. iomega drives, western digital drives, Espon printer and scanner
etc.....

If a company follows Apples 'rules' for hardware and software then
that product
will work with Apple computers. Actually intel produce chips
specifically for Apple last
I heard.


>>nobody else is allowed to
> > install Apple's OS. That's orders of magnitude more restrictive than simply
> > giving a price break for exclusivity. You can't be a Mac-compatible OEMat any
> > price, period.

>
> > The only reason Apple hasn't got into trouble is that it's such a smallpart
> > of the market. It turns out that many people don't want to be in Apple's
> > stranglehold, so they just buy PCs instead.


Is that really true, most just prefer to buy the cheapest product that
will do the job they want.

>Apple apparently would rather have
> > a tiny minority of followers of Steve Jobs' peculiar religion than a much
> > higher revenue. Microsoft was always more interested in giving the massmarket
> > what it wanted.


That's the difference between Ford a Ferrari isn;t it


 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg writes:


>> About 95% of all Windows users complain about Windows.


> Many users complain about their computers, but not Windows specifically.


>> Sure. Any colour^WPC that's black^Wintel-compatible.


> It has to have hardware that will run Windows, but that's the only
> restriction, and that is technically inevitable.


So it doesn't matter if an OS runs on many, few or only one
systes --- just buy the right hardware. Say, a Mac.

>> Kindly look at the list of system types Linux runs on.


> Why? Linux is unimportant on the desktop.


Linux is getting more important every year, runs on systems
(especially including older ones) Windows wouldn't even crawl
on, etc.

There's a reason your DSL-modem might run Linux, but not
Windows.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg writes:


>> So how comes so many people use Firefox instead of IE?


> Many people think it's better, although IE still leads. But Firefox was not an
> option when manufacturers were forced to offer machines without IE, as I
> recall.


MS was forced to offer machines without IE, but OEMs were
free to add IE or Firefox or Opera or ...

And MS could well have included Firefox, but didn't.

>> Apple's systems are also freely available for sale. (By your
>> own definition: anyone can buy it.)


> You cannot buy the OS and run it on non-Apple hardware (legally).


You can't run Windows on non-windows capable hardware either.

>> Linux is also freely available, for sale and for free, so by
>> your reasoning it should be even more dominant than Windows.


> Linux is not a player on the desktop, for a number of reasons, one of which is
> that it's not commercial software (i.e., software with a support structure and
> an incentive to follow the market).


If you cannot find better commercial support for Linux --- and
thousands of applications --- than for Windows as offered by MS,
you are not looking. Of course you need to pay.

And of course commercial distributions exist and follow the market.

Unlike MS, where inertia is great, things are Not Invented Here
(how did they follow the Internet and how do they still follow
standards --- in much the same manner that fish follow migrating
caribou), and We Don't Have To Care, We're A Monopoly.

Only when threatened by viable competition or exposed security
bugs MS moves. (OK, after *much* cattle prodding they learned
to sort-of react to reported security bugs. Finally.)

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Mxsmanic<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
>> build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it,

>
> How would you build your own laptop?
>

Buy the parts and do the assembly.

>> and Microsoft would
>> happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that.

>
> at a much higher price than the surcharge they place on
> vendors.
>


Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.

>> Thousands of
>> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.

>


>
>> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
>> what it wanted.

>
> What Microsoft wanted, true.
>



I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
arts industry.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/17/2011 7:01 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Mxsmanic<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Wolfgang Weisselberg writes:

>
>>> About 95% of all Windows users complain about Windows.

>
>> Many users complain about their computers, but not Windows specifically.

>
>>> Sure. Any colour^WPC that's black^Wintel-compatible.

>
>> It has to have hardware that will run Windows, but that's the only
>> restriction, and that is technically inevitable.

>
> So it doesn't matter if an OS runs on many, few or only one
> systes --- just buy the right hardware. Say, a Mac.
>
>>> Kindly look at the list of system types Linux runs on.

>
>> Why? Linux is unimportant on the desktop.

>
> Linux is getting more important every year, runs on systems
> (especially including older ones) Windows wouldn't even crawl
> on, etc.
>


Business people buy computers and software as an aid to running their
business. Linux apps have too big a futz factor. My Droid runs fine on
the Android OS and has reasonable speech recognition built in. . I would
have preferred an iPod, but the speech recognition sucks and, at that
time AT&T came with it. I did not want AT&T, for many reasons.

--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
J. Clarke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
In article <4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> > Mxsmanic<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
> >> build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it,

> >
> > How would you build your own laptop?
> >

> Buy the parts and do the assembly.


Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?

Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.

> >> and Microsoft would
> >> happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that.

> >
> > at a much higher price than the surcharge they place on
> > vendors.
> >

>
> Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.
>
> >> Thousands of
> >> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.

> >

>
> >
> >> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
> >> what it wanted.

> >
> > What Microsoft wanted, true.
> >

>
>
> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
> arts industry.


One reason is that if you use Microsoft you're single-source from the
largest server down to your cell phone, so no finger-pointing. If
you're using *nix servers to support Windows desktops then you're going
to be dealing with two groups of specialist both of which see the other
OS as the root of all evi.


 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/17/2011 9:26 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<4dd270c1$0$12519$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>> On 5/16/2011 10:46 AM, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>> Mxsmanic<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No. Microsoft has never had control in the way Apple does. You could always
>>>> build your own PC and install anything you wanted on it,
>>>
>>> How would you build your own laptop?
>>>

>> Buy the parts and do the assembly.

>
> Uh, where do you buy the parts to build a laptop?


Google is your friend

<
http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-diy-15-gaming-notebook-intel-ati-edition-eol.html>

>
> Desktop machines can be assembled from commodity parts--there are
> standard connectors and standard form factors so you can buy a case from
> one source and a motherboard from another and a power supply from a
> third and it will all work together. That is not true of laptops.
>
>>>> and Microsoft would
>>>> happily sell you a copy of their own OS if you wanted that.
>>>
>>> at a much higher price than the surcharge they place on
>>> vendors.
>>>

>>
>> Yup! And when you need support, you go to the vendor, not MS.
>>
>>>> Thousands of
>>>> companies build PCs that will run Microsoft operating systems.
>>>

>>
>>>
>>>> Microsoft was always more interested in giving the mass market
>>>> what it wanted.
>>>
>>> What Microsoft wanted, true.
>>>

>>
>>
>> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
>> arts industry.

>
> One reason is that if you use Microsoft you're single-source from the
> largest server down to your cell phone, so no finger-pointing. If
> you're using *nix servers to support Windows desktops then you're going
> to be dealing with two groups of specialist both of which see the other
> OS as the root of all evi.
>


Many sophisticated small offices use MS products on their desktops with
an Apache server.

We are at an interesting point in the computing cycle. Originally we had
dumb terminals. We migrated to all in one desktops. Then we networked
them. Now the cloud, square one.



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-17-2011
On 5/17/2011 12:29 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:
> PeterN writes:
>
>> I wonder why most businesses use MS products, except in the graphics
>> arts industry.

>
> Microsoft Windows has the best infrastructure in place, and has the widest
> number of applications available for it. It's the simplest and most reliable
> path to follow.


My comment was meant to be a rhetorical response.


>
> Macs lead in graphics for historical reasons. Apple got heavily into graphics
> and electronic publishing at a time when nobody in the Windows environment
> really cared. Windows was preceded by a non-GUI OS, so users obviously didn't
> have much in the way of graphics to enjoy. For these and other reasons, Apple
> got a head start, from which it still benefits today.



I use PS on both my PC (Win7 64 bit) and on Macs. Although some gearhead
may argue, for my purposes I have noticed little difference in speed.

>
> If you plan to use a computer for nothing but music composition, video or
> photo editing, electronic publishing, or the like, a Mac is probably a good
> choice. If you need a computer that can do lots of things generally, a PC is
> probably a better choice. If you need to run business applications, a PC is an
> excellent choice. And if you want to run lots of video games, a Mac may simply
> not be an option at all.



--
Peter
 
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
Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? bob Digital Photography 66 07-03-2011 10:02 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 24 06-08-2011 09:58 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? Wolfgang Weisselberg Digital Photography 31 05-26-2011 11:20 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 3 05-20-2011 11:59 PM
Re: Possible to extract high resolution b/w from a raw file? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 3 05-20-2011 11:54 PM



Advertisments