Lightroom vs. Apertu Curves

In article , Sandman
wrote:

https://www.evernote.com/shard/s1/sh...-80cc-e6c77163
e2f7

/20a32bd46be537bacec746fa7f41db0b/deep/0/Screenshot-2014-08-18-21.22.3
9.pn
g

nospam:
that's just a number in the interface.

Sandman:
That's my point.

no, your point is that it's 0-255 to the app which it isn't
necessarily.

Yes, it is. If you set it to 255, the app isn't setting it to 10 bit 1023.

depends on how the app is written.

nospam:
you have no idea what goes on internally .

Sandman:
Internally, it's 32 bit.

then how do you explain the 255 in the ui?

The UI isn't internal to the processing.

exactly the point.

what numbers are in the ui make no difference to what goes on
internally.

Sandman:
When you set the slider to 8 bit value 1, the internal value is
16,843,009.

no, the internal value is whatever the slider sends to the app,

An UI slider send either 0-100 or the range the developer asks for. A 256
pixel wide slider can never send the value 1,024 *and* 1,023. It can only
send 256 discrete values.

the developer can ask for 0-1023.

see how easy it is?

meanwhile, the ui still says 255.

Sandman:
If the UI accomodated 10 bit output, you could have set the value
to 1, and internally it would have been 4,194,304.

the ui does not need to accommodate anything.

If it is to correctly represent 10 bit data, it must.

not true.

what the slider has to do is have its max/min 0-1023, but the
*label* on the ui stays the same.

trivial to do.

And would give the user no more control, since even if the max value is
1023, every move of the slider one pixel would change the value by four
steps.

So max value is 1023, move the slider one pixel to the left and the value
is not 1019, then 1015 and so on. Granularity... lost. Get it?

unless it's designed to give them more control.

you're not thinking this through.

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

I do know of a RAW converter that is more sophisticated,
and it is not from Abobe.

it's not from dave coffin either.

But one that (like most RAW converters) is significantly
based on Coffin's work.

adobe camera raw is *very* different and not based on dave coffin's
work at all.

I don't know how much of Coffin's coded still exists in
Camera Raw, but it certainly started out based on
Coffin's set of algorithms.

once again, you're talking about things you know nothing about.

Speak for yourself.

i am, and you are wrong.

adobe camera raw is *not* based on dcraw's algorithms nor is there any
dcraw code in camera raw.

As I said, I don't know how much of Coffin's code is still in Abobe
products,

yet you keep saying:
but whether you like it or not they started out by using
dcraw.c entirely.

and i'm telling you no they didn't.

Who cares what you tell anyone about anything! Your
track record is near zero. And you have no idea what
Abobe does or doesn't do, aside from how they label
sliders with what the marketing folks find best.

resorting to ad hominems again, i see, and you're completely wrong
about what i know about adobe.

i know quite a bit about what they do and have done and have met many
of those involved.

you haven't even *used* the software, and you have *no* idea what is
going on with adobe.

thomas knoll used dcraw as a starter to figure out the formats and went
on to do his own decoding.

So he started by using dcraw.c entirely, and eventually
replaced that code with his own.

completely wrong.

there is no dcraw code in camera raw nor was there ever. period.

adobe uses dcraw and other resources for informational purposes. for
instance, if dave coffin decoded a maker note, adobe might use that
information in their code. sometimes nikon/canon/etc. doesn't tell them
what they want to know, so they look elsewhere.

that's very different than basing their code on someone else's code.

they do *not* copy his code. why would they even want to?

the extent of dcraw's influence on camera raw is documentation, where
adobe might use it as a guide to learn more about a format.

the algorithms in camera raw are entirely adobe and it would be a step
backwards to use dcraw's algorithms (plus his code is awful anyway).

Giggle snort.

Odd how virtually everyone uses that awful code...

there's lots of awful code out there.

it's an unfortunate state of the industry.

Regardless, why did you even bring up Coffin and DCRAW?

you brought up other raw converters being more sophisticated.

And the most sophisticated are largely based on dcraw.c.

then they're not that sophisticated.

they're taking the easy way out.

One reason for that is because virtually all research done
on demosaicing Bayer CFA encoding uses DCRAW as the code
base.

nonsense. most bayer research is proprietary and not found in open
source software, as is most state of the art.

Okay, I guess you were just pointing out where Abobe's
product fits into the entire sceme of things. Somewhere
below DCRAW.

once again you've never used camera raw and have no idea what you're
talking about.

dcraw wishes it could be as good as camera raw, if only for its speed.

In article , sid
wrote:

Floyd said the exposure slider changes brightness level. He was wrong.
Live with it. I have no idea why you have so much pride invested in this.

no pride, just right.

Oh look what Adobe says about it in their lightroom_reference.pdf

147
Developing photos
Last updated 6/14/2014


Exposure
(All) Sets the overall image brightness. Adjust the slider until the photo
looks good and the image is the desired brightness.

that's a simplified explanation.

again, it's *more* than just brightness.

it also doesn't say is that it works differently than the previous
brightness slider.

yet another example of someone who doesn't use an app trying to tell
those who do use it how it works.

nospam wrote:
In article , sid
wrote:

Here he is saying that the exposure slider is a brightness slider. Not
that it affects brightness, but that it is a brightness slider. I.e.
moving it to the right increases brightness and vice versa.

It doesn't matter how much you twist it he is saying that what you call
an exposure slider actually adjusts brightness because exposure can
*only* be adjusted at the point of exposure.

again, it doesn't change the *actual* exposure. floyd came up with that
nonsense and you're following suit.

Every knows that ffs, keep up will you!

everyone except floyd.

it's *equivalent* to changing it.

In as much as it changes the brightness levels

not as simplistic as a generic brightness adjustment

this is a very, very simple concept. how is it you and floyd miss it?

No one has missed it and if you actually read the posts that you reply to
you'd understand that.

several people have, and continue to do so.

Nowhere does he claim that the exposure
slider in Lightroom is actually a simple/true brightness slider that
adjusts brightness in a linear fashion.

yes he does.

No he doesn't, here's the quote that you snipped

Floyd L. Davidson
08/12/2014

"Isn't that rather obvious from what I said. "Exposure" can
only be changed with shutter speed and aperture, before the
picture is taken. Which does not stop several software
programs from incorrectly labeling the brightness adjustment
as "exposure"."

Here he has just expressed his opinion the the control labelled exposure
should say brightness, not that it should behave in any way differently,
just that it should have a different name.

his opinion is wrong.

calling it brightness would confuse the user because it works
differently than a brightness control.

again, this is a very simple concept.

A simple concept that you can't understand. As sid pointed out in
another article, Abobe says it is a brightness adjustment.

"Exposure
(All) Sets the overall image brightness. Adjust the
slider until the photo looks good and the image is the
desired brightness."

This is, of course, incorrect. The Exposure slider will make an image
birghter or darker, but it is not a brightness slider.

That's on a par with nospams "although finder manages files, it's not a
'file manager'"

it's more than a basic file manager,

but a file manager all the same

nope.

the concepts are lost on you.

managing individual files is an incredibly primitive method of managing
user data and will eventually be going away, whether you like it or
not.

but the point is that file managers are old school and are eventually
going away on all platforms.

You're free to express that opinion, even if it is wrong.

it's not wrong. it's already happening, and it's not an apple thing
either.

you're blind to it. that's all.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

nospam wrote:

In article , sid
wrote:

Floyd said the exposure slider changes brightness level. He was wrong.
Live with it. I have no idea why you have so much pride invested in
this.

no pride, just right.

Oh look what Adobe says about it in their lightroom_reference.pdf

147
Developing photos
Last updated 6/14/2014


Exposure
(All) Sets the overall image brightness. Adjust the slider until the
photo looks good and the image is the desired brightness.

that's a simplified explanation.

Are you not even happy with Adobes explanation now then?

again, it's *more* than just brightness.

it also doesn't say is that it works differently than the previous
brightness slider.

Why would it?

yet another example of someone who doesn't use an app trying to tell
those who do use it how it works.

I would take that up with Adobe if I were you, fancy having someone who
doesn't use the app writing the manual, whatever next?

--
sid

On 8/13/2014 8:19 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-08-13 13:03:09 +0000, Sandman said:

heavily edited for brevity

Which begs the question

I thought we had covered the "begs the question" â‰* "raises the question'
issue"
http://begthequestion.info

edited

What does "â‰*" mean?

John

"John Turco" wrote in message
...
On 8/13/2014 8:19 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-08-13 13:03:09 +0000, Sandman said:

heavily edited for brevity

Which begs the question

I thought we had covered the "begs the question" ? "raises the question'
issue"
http://begthequestion.info

edited

What does "?" mean?

John

"Not equal to"

In article , John Turco
wrote:

I thought we had covered the "begs the question" ‚ "raises the question'
issue"
http://begthequestion.info

edited

What does "‚" mean?

not equal to.

In article , nospam wrote:

Sandman:
No, it uses another class for reading, I've already told you about
this.

it uses a whole slew of other classes for all sorts of stuff,
including nsfilemanager for file management, which ultimately calls
fread.

the fact is that the developer calls nsimage to read a file or url
and that's what happens. they do not call nsimagerep directly.

They can, and sometimes have to, if the image file is in a format that
there isn't a native NSImageRep for.

My point was that support for reading image file formats is not in NSImage,
it is just a data container. It's a pretty important distinction in the
current discussion.


--
Sandman[.net]

In article , nospam wrote:

Sandman:
An UI slider send either 0-100 or the range the developer asks
for. A 256 pixel wide slider can never send the value 1,024 *and*
1,023. It can only send 256 discrete values.

the developer can ask for 0-1023.

see how easy it is?

meanwhile, the ui still says 255.

You just don't get it. And I realize I can't make you get it either. So,
have a nice day.


--
Sandman[.net]