Re: Media Testing for maclife.de
Re: Media Testing for maclife.de
- Subject: Re: Media Testing for maclife.de
- From: Paul Foerts <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 14:14:43 +0200
On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:10:23 -0700 Chris Cox wrote:
>>>> Which means you are not profiling the camera at all, but rather
>>>> profiling the RAW conversion software and making corrections/
>>>> adjustments to the processed RAW output instead of the camera RAW
>>>> data.
>>> So is *this* what in fact we're arguing about all the time?!?
>>One of your mistakes is that you didn't understand exactly what you were
>>testing (see above). But then you made bad claims based on that
>>misunderstanding, and attempted to compare things that were not directly
>>comparable.
--------------
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 05:01:26 +0200 Uli Zappe wrote:
>>Am 13.09.2008 um 02:10 schrieb Chris Cox:
>>What would happen if you submitted a thesis to a university that contained
>>obvious mistakes and unsupported conclusions? Your advisor or the reviewers
>>would tell you that you had mistakes and that your conclusions were
>>unsupported and to please go work on it some more. Very much like I'm doing
>>here.
>Yeah, that pretty much sums it up: you are the professor, and I am the student.
>It's simply unconceivable it could be the other way round, isn't it?
Well I'm sure 99,9 % of the scientists here would prefer Uli for professor
because he speaks like a human being and not like a stubborn "robot" (sorry
for calling names :-)), who is not able to teach but only dictates/repeats
the contents of his (maybe large) "database" in a "biased" way.
Explaining things to a machine does not work.
Others have tried to suggest/begged for updating/repairing the "Custom CMYK"
module in Photoshop. Their "wish list" was killed because the "messenger"
apparently "did not use the correct procedure" (I don't know if the
messenger had to leave Adobe because of this "authority" thing).
This subject did surface several times on this list:
Chris Cox - 6:39pm Jun 27, 05 PST wrote:
We've tried to remove Custom CMYK entirely, but too many people complained.
Chris Cox - Mon, 08 Sep 18.53:12 -0700 wrote
Yeah, every time I try to get rid of it, somebody screams bloody murder.
> On 9/7/08 2:17 PM, "email@hidden"
><email@hidden> wrote:
>> Instead with have a basically broken
>> CMYK engine that's basically unchanged since version 2.
>From this I may conclude: once the "authority" has spoken, even "too many
people" are not able to convince "the authority" to reconsider its view on
the subject. This was/is a clearly a personal matter and is going on for
years. A change of authorities would prove to be more beneficial to Adobe.
Paul Foerts
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden