possible end to jpeg v raw debate

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Peter N, Feb 3, 2011.

  1. He doesn't know. Oddly, it's just about the only
    correct comment he's made on anything recently. Watch
    though, if he explains it, he'll get most of the reasons

    Lets start with a RAW file isn't and image, and a JPEG
    is whether it is lossy or lossless.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Feb 15, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. Peter N

    Noons Guest

    Noons, Feb 16, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    Betcha half the deniers haven't studied the specs.

    I don't discard the possibility.
    PeterN, Feb 16, 2011
  4. Peter N

    Noons Guest

    PeterN wrote,on my timestamp of 16/02/2011 12:06 PM:
    (twilight zone clip inserted)
    Noons, Feb 16, 2011
  5. Stupid of me, really. I shall accept the fact that not even
    a whole university of physics professors and mathematical
    proof won't dislodge your position.
    So is DIN A4 paper. DIN stands for Deutsche IndustrieNorm.
    The standard is that electricity flows from + to -.

    Unfortunately, electrons --- the stuff that flows in classic
    electricity, like in cables etc. --- come from - and go to +.

    So much for your standards and reality.
    I see you when I look behind. In the distance.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 18, 2011
  6. I too can snip everything you said.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 18, 2011
  7. Very well. I clarify that you don't need clarification,
    since you cannot describe what is unclear to you.
    Why do you expect me to guess what clarification you need?

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 18, 2011
  8. Just like everybody else, I'm a certified telepath, I *always*
    can read *anybodys* mind. Of course I know what everybody means.
    You mean, Floyd the All-Knowing will pronounce everything
    I say as wrong. No matter what I say.

    Well, 2 can play that game.
    WRONG. Both are just numbers with very many digits. The RAW
    usually has more digits, though.

    Unless you hand-paint these numbers on canvas or similar,
    neither can be an image.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 18, 2011
  9. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    I won't play your little game. You made a statement. I asked for
    clarification. You then snip the statement and claim you don't know what
    need clarification.
    PeterN, Feb 19, 2011
  10. Without stating what clarification was and what wasn't needed,
    for a self-evident statement. Even after me asking.

    For all I know I'd have to begin at teaching you the difference
    between RAW and JPEG --- or the theory behind compression and
    entropy. I'm not willing to start in kindergarden and go over
    the life experience of 20+ years just in case that was what you
    didn't understood, didn't believed or thought unclear.

    If you have a question regarding the statement, you are
    presumably old enough to ask.
    It's trivial to look it up again, if you need it.
    The statement didn't. It's self-evident. "The sun rises in
    the east" doesn't need 'support' or 'clarification' either,
    yet you'd probably redefine what east is and then look at me
    wide-eyed in shock and ask me to support that statement, too.
    Instead of asking "Isn't east at the north pole?", which would
    show a lack of knowledge, but at least allow one to clear up
    where *you* needed clarification.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 20, 2011
  11. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    EOD as previously stated.
    PeterN, Feb 20, 2011
  12. Peter N

    dj_nme Guest

    Hi Peter,
    I am curious as to which part of Wolfgang's statement you didn't understand.

    Is it (as Wolfgang asked): The obvious one (lossless > lossy) or the
    [other] obvious one (8 bits don't contain the latitude 12 or 14 bits do)?
    Or is it something else which requires explanation?
    You never said and if you don't say, then you'll never get the
    clarification which you claimed to require.
    dj_nme, Feb 20, 2011
  13. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    My question immediately followed his statement. Since he responded by
    snipping I see little point in pursuing the issue.
    PeterN, Feb 20, 2011
  14. Peter N

    dj_nme Guest

    Going by your reply above:
    You didn't say then (I actually read your original rely to wolfgang) and
    you still haven't said.
    That must mean you really didn't have anything you needed clarification for.
    That's all you needed to write.

    Mystery solved.
    dj_nme, Feb 21, 2011
  15. That is valid, as there never seems to be any point in attempting
    to discuss any issue with Wolfgang, and this is a good example.
    You logic is irrational.

    Here is the actual exchange:

    And your support for that statement is?

    Wolfgang made a valid statement that is relatively easy
    to provide support for, but when asked to not only
    refused, but as he usually does he went ballistic.

    The funny part, and perhaps the reason Wolfgang had the
    anxiety attack, is that *he* was arguing in other
    articles that the statement "There is significantly more
    information in RAW" is not true. He probably saw the
    paradox he boxed himself into in separate sub-threads.
    (That might not be it at all, given that the last 15 or
    20 articles he's posted have been progressively absurd,
    which probably indicates some external issue as a cause,
    and we just see the effects.)

    The response from PeterN was precisely appropriate.
    Floyd L. Davidson, Feb 21, 2011
  16. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    You may make any convenient assumption you want. I thought my original
    meaning clear.
    PeterN, Feb 24, 2011
  17. There is no use discussing anything with Floyd, as he can't take
    criticism or differing oppinions. This is just a smear campain
    by Floyd because I called him on that. And found claims that
    he made that were wrong.
    Because it doesn't match your pre-conceived oppinion.
    Oh, you conveniently forget me asking what part of the
    statement was unclear. Oh dear, Floyd, you are lying by
    omission. Let me re-include it:

    | For what part of the claim?
    | The obvious one (lossless> lossy) or the obvious one (8 bits
    | don't contain the latitude 12 or 14 bits do)?

    At which point PeterN went ballistic.

    If I had gone ballistic, you'd have seen scorched earth.
    And your support for that statement is?
    (Hint: Try and find any such articles. Have fun)
    Please take your meds, Floyd, you are mixing up persons.
    Ah, maybe Floyd's condition is worsening.
    Sure. If PeterN wanted to come over as a laughing stock.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 25, 2011
  18. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    Now is the time to explain your statement. No bullshit. just facts. No
    twisting, either, as I have seen you try. You are very big on personal
    attacks. Now put up of shut up.
    PeterN, Feb 26, 2011
  19. *sigh*

    Lossless jpeg takes more space than lossy jpeg. This should
    be self evident, if not, google.

    Jpeg is 8 bits gamma coded, which doesn't have the latitude
    of RAW with 12+ bits. This should be self evident, if not,

    So you have a format larger than lossy (normal) jpeg, that
    doesn't offer the advantages of RAW. The worst of both
    worlds. That also should be self evident.

    And now it's time for you to explain what part you didn't
    understand the first time and the second time around. No
    attacks, no clamshelling, just facts. No twisting, as you
    have done, no biting and no brickwalling. You are very big
    on passive agressive. Now put up or shut up.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 26, 2011
  20. Peter N

    PeterN Guest

    A convenient snip of a relevant comment, that entirely changes the
    meaning of my above statement. I requested, no demanded a clarification
    of your derogatory statement about me.

    I'm in favor of motherhood and apple pie. Is disk space your sole criteria?

    And how many bits in JPEG 2000?

    Look at the statement made immediately prior to my request for clarity.
    PeterN, Feb 27, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.