color of spring

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:


nevertheless, why don't you enlighten everyone and show us how you can
match what dehaze does, with whatever tricks you can come up with.

be sure to explain every step of the way in clear unambiguous terms or
tony will tell you just how much of a ****ty instructor you are.

let's see just how much you know (cough).

He should do that. Please post one your photographs with hazing and
let's see what he can do with it.

whoosh.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

nevertheless, why don't you enlighten everyone and show us how you can
match what dehaze does, with whatever tricks you can come up with.

be sure to explain every step of the way in clear unambiguous terms or
tony will tell you just how much of a ****ty instructor you are.

let's see just how much you know (cough).

He should do that. Please post one your photographs with hazing and
let's see what he can do with it.

whoosh.

That wasn't the sound of you rushing to post a link to one of your
photos, was it?

No, I didn't think so.

whoosh again.

maybe if you stopped bashing and tried to discuss the actual topic,
this newsgroup wouldn't be the cesspool that it's become. you might
even learn something, although i have my doubts.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

nevertheless, why don't you enlighten everyone and show us how you can
match what dehaze does, with whatever tricks you can come up with.

be sure to explain every step of the way in clear unambiguous terms or
tony will tell you just how much of a ****ty instructor you are.

let's see just how much you know (cough).

He should do that. Please post one your photographs with hazing and
let's see what he can do with it.

whoosh.

That wasn't the sound of you rushing to post a link to one of your
photos, was it?

No, I didn't think so.

whoosh again.

maybe if you stopped bashing and tried to discuss the actual topic,
this newsgroup wouldn't be the cesspool that it's become. you might
even learn something, although i have my doubts.

What do you have to offer?

Nothing. All you do is argue with other people.

says the person who admits that he intentionally trolls.

i offer plenty, but you're so bent on arguing over everything *but* the
topic that threads instantly derail.

Even this thing about Adobe's haze filter. You haven't offered
anything except to say it works.

it does work, and rather well.

meanwhile, you haven't offered anything about how it works or if it can
be done in other ways.

all you do is bash and argue with people.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Even this thing about Adobe's haze filter. You haven't offered
anything except to say it works.

it does work, and rather well.

meanwhile, you haven't offered anything about how it works or if it can
be done in other ways.

Of course not. I'm not concerned about how it works.

clearly.

you're only interested in trolling.

On Fri, 20 May 2016 22:32:02 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2016 22:05:40 -0400, nospam
wrote:

Even this thing about Adobe's haze filter. You haven't offered
anything except to say it works.

it does work, and rather well.

meanwhile, you haven't offered anything about how it works or if it can
be done in other ways.

Of course not. I'm not concerned about how it works. Why should I
be? I'm not interesting in yammering on about how it works. I'm not
the one trying to impress people here. That's your bag.

I had a photograph where I used it. It works. I'll use it again if I
have another photograph where it might help.

I'm not aware of any other process that works as simple or as well, so
I don't discuss other ways.

If, however, Eric want to try another process or feels another process
works for him...that's his business. I don't understand why anyone
should be critical of him for doing that.

I was using Lab in PS for haze correction before Adobe added the haze
removal module to LR.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I was using Lab in PS for haze correction before Adobe added the haze
removal module to LR.

so what? now that they have, why not use it, as it's quite a bit more
effective, significantly more flexible and with a lot less effort.

i doubt you've spent much time with it, if you have at all.

On Sat, 21 May 2016 00:40:50 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I was using Lab in PS for haze correction before Adobe added the haze
removal module to LR.

so what? now that they have, why not use it, as it's quite a bit more
effective, significantly more flexible and with a lot less effort.

i doubt you've spent much time with it, if you have at all.

Probably more time with each than you have with Lab.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 5/20/2016 10:32 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2016 22:05:40 -0400, nospam
wrote:

Even this thing about Adobe's haze filter. You haven't offered
anything except to say it works.

it does work, and rather well.

meanwhile, you haven't offered anything about how it works or if it can
be done in other ways.

Of course not. I'm not concerned about how it works. Why should I
be? I'm not interesting in yammering on about how it works. I'm not
the one trying to impress people here. That's your bag.

I had a photograph where I used it. It works. I'll use it again if I
have another photograph where it might help.

I'm not aware of any other process that works as simple or as well, so
I don't discuss other ways.

If, however, Eric want to try another process or feels another process
works for him...that's his business. I don't understand why anyone
should be critical of him for doing that.


An insecure troll might need to be. It would feel left out of normal
conversation, so snarky comments get attention.


--
PeterN

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I was using Lab in PS for haze correction before Adobe added the haze
removal module to LR.

so what? now that they have, why not use it, as it's quite a bit more
effective, significantly more flexible and with a lot less effort.

i doubt you've spent much time with it, if you have at all.

Probably more time with each than you have with Lab.

probably not.

On Sun, 22 May 2016 22:21:11 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

I was using Lab in PS for haze correction before Adobe added the haze
removal module to LR.

so what? now that they have, why not use it, as it's quite a bit more
effective, significantly more flexible and with a lot less effort.

i doubt you've spent much time with it, if you have at all.

Probably more time with each than you have with Lab.

probably not.

Where do get the time when you are not doing all this practising to
avoid the hazards of the highway? Don't you sleep?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens