Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/05/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On May 28, 2005, at 2:41 PM, B. D. Colen wrote: > Yes and no, Feli - You need the 'information' in the first place, and > some > flare can be virtually impossible to eliminate - but color fringing? > vigneting? And various forms of vertical and horizontal distortion? > It's > amazing what software can do. ;-) That's why I said 'some problems'. There is an awful lot you can fix with software, but some things are just a no go. ;-) Some people (not necessarily you) seem to be under that impression that computers are magic and can fix anything. I once spent a good half hour trying to explain to a client, why you can't take a piece footage that is severely out of focus and simply put back in focus. They kept trying to convince us that all we had to do was sharpen it, just like they had done at home in Photoshop. He just couldn't deal the concepts of "soft" and "out of focus". They finally gave up, but I was left with the impression that he thought we were lying to him, 'because he had done it at home in Photoshop". Geez! Feli > > On 5/28/05 12:23 PM, "Feli" <feli2@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> Weeellllll, you can eliminate some optical problems in software, but >> not not all >> of them. The rule of "You can't make chicken salad out of chickens*it" >> still applies. ;-) >> >> feli >> >> On May 28, 2005, at 8:48 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: >> >>> What's the 'ethical' philosophical difference between some optical >>> engineer >>> twitching lens formulas endlessly to get rid of optical aberrations, >>> and >>> then producing a lens that is only available to/useable by folks who >>> can >>> afford to invest in a particular camera line - or chose to do so - >>> and >>> a >>> software engineer twitching 1s and 0s so that Photoshop - or some >>> other >>> software - can eliminate the same aberrations at a later point in the >>> process, thus allowing anyone who can afford/obtain a copy of the >>> program to >>> use whatever lens they like/can afford to get 'optically' similar >>> results? >>> >>> Not a damn thing in my book. The later may not bode well for the >>> financial >>> survival of the former, but it doesn't have a damn thing to do with >>> what is >>> or isn't photography, or what is or isn't real. ;-) >>> >> ________________________________________________________ >> feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 www.elanphotos.com >> >> >> no archive >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > ________________________________________________________ feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 www.elanphotos.com no archive