Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: psd or tiff?  (Read 8340 times)
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #40 on: March 19, 2014, 11:51:03 AM »
ReplyReply

So you still cannot justify why you seem to think there is no difference between a flattened and non flattened file then and resort to insults instead?
Because there is no difference. If you're free from making Duotones or Displacement maps do this:

Open a layered document with edits.
Duplicate it then flatten that copy.
Use Apply Image command, subtract one from the other with offset at 128.
Results: they are identical pixel for pixel. The resulting file made of the subtraction is completely gray. When the images are truly identical as they are in this case, every pixel in the image would be a solid level 128 gray. Pixels that aren't level 128 gray are different by the amount they depart from 128 gray which is useful. You can use Levels to exaggerate the difference, which makes patterns easier to see. With the Offset of 128, its far easier to see differences. Not necessary with this test, the results are all pixels are level 128. This is HOW I justify why I seem to think there is no difference between a flattened and non flattened file. Scientific testing and analysis, give it a try sometime...

As to insults, you're the one thowing them out and the paper trail is clear to probably everyone but you:

Not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or genuinely believe the nonsense you come out with, Old Dog.
I seem to recall you wittering on about how you could not work non-destructively in PS some years back and you didn't make any more sense back then either.
But then I'm sure you'll try and redefine the English language to make it mean whatever you believe.
I make a point of reading people's post very carefully before replying and have very little time for numpties like yourself who do not show the same curtesy.
Are you really so very dippy, you do not understand this?
I did read and 'understand' post where you tripped yourself up with your own 'logic'.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 11:58:26 AM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 19, 2014, 03:44:32 PM »
ReplyReply

OK, I was hoping to be an adult in the room and move on. But you insist on being shown your inability to read and comprehend English. I'll try again. Here's an exact copy and paste of what I wrote:You wrote:Let me try again using bold type and colors, because again, clearly you missed the point:
BTW, layers are only 'non destructive' if your idea of non destructive is the ability to undo an edit.

So your response above shows you clearly missed the point of destructive and non destructive operations on data with any set of layers. Of course you also missed the part about LR probably because the term parametric edits went over your head and it's not your style to ask questions with the aim of understanding a process.

And you of course totally missed the point of vjbelle: There's no need to have the entire workflow in one file. If you are done editing (see, I wrote it again, take note), there is NO difference in the data in terms of data loss: send that data to a printer, it's functionally akin to flattening the data, the edits are applied to the data, there IS data loss. It is not non destructive. There is no free lunch. Work in high bit. So to write this again, hopefully in a way that your distortion warped duotoned mind can understand, if you are done editing, there is nothing the layers do for you. You might as well do as others here have suggested, flatten the file and save it as a TIFF. Yes! Outside editing again, there is no difference between a flattened file and a layered file in terms of the data and data loss going to a printer, being accessed outside Photoshop etc. The data was edited, there are rounding errors, there is data loss. In both cases. Hopefully short sentences are easier for you to comprehend. You may have read it, you clearly didn't understand it. You may think you read the post(s) carefully, obviously this wasn't the case. If anyone is being far from courteous (you wrote curtesy?) it's you sir, with the sentence you wrote just above a prefect example among others on just this page. Pot calling the kettle black. So I'm giving some back here, you certainly deserve it. Seems you are no better at reading and writing your own posts then those of others.
Now you probably should take my advise and move on. I suspect you couldn’t debate yourself out of a wet paper bag  Grin
What patronising nonsense. To use an analogy - you've proved quite well that a circle is well circular. The problem is that we're talking about squares. Whether a flattened image is identical to an unflattened one when printing is completely and utterly beside the point. Never said it wasn't either.
My whole point was about being able to go back and re-edit an unflattened image. Not something you can do once flattened.
Re-editing is not the same as being able to simply undo an edit. Though my PS edits are in fact undoable i.e. non-destructive, as much as they can be. Which is quite a lot for my work as it happens.

BTW I know exactly what parametric editing is and how it differs from bitmap editing and is why I called you out on your duff reasoning. What also seems to have passed you by is that a lot of PS work can in fact be parametric, smart objects, smart filters, adjustment layers, not exactly old school bitmap editing is it? A lot of my PS workflow is very similar to my LR workflow in fact or to be precise, my LR workflows resembles my PS workflow as I did that style of non-destructive editing with images in PS before LR appeared. Though LR is much better at it, with for example virtual copies saving a lot of space compared to actual physical duplicates. PS is a very, very clever programme and can do a lot of the same things as LR, albeit in different ways. Heck it now even has the power of the LR dev module available as a filter and not just with smart objects opening via ACR.


Getting back OT, easy to dismiss your concepts for PSD: Make dutone as you desire, convert to RGB (or CMYK for output), done. Same color appearance, can save TIFF. No need for duotones.
And yet again, you do not get it. I re-edit my work and I do not flatten things because I like to keep all the editing options I can open. Plus, if a client asks for some shots with the tone of a particular toned image, I can quickly look at the original, copy the duo/tritone info and replicate. Your method would involve pointlessly starting from scratch.
But then again I'm a working photographer, whereas you take a few snaps now and again with minimal post work. Yet you ignorantly try and lecture me about my job.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 19, 2014, 03:51:19 PM »
ReplyReply

My whole point was about being able to go back and re-edit an unflattened image.
Thanks for admitting you completely missed my points and misread and missunderstood what I wrote.
Quote
What also seems to have passed you by is that a lot of PS work can in fact be parametric, smart objects, smart filters, adjustment layers, not exactly old school bitmap editing is it?
Again, it's passed you by, there are no parametric edits in Photoshop** as there are in LR. And yes, it is totally old school bitmap editing. A term you seem to also misunderstand.
Quote
PS is a very, very clever programme and can do a lot of the same things as LR, albeit in different ways.
Nice try moving the discussion away from your misundersatndings!
Quote
To use an analogy - you've proved quite well that a circle is well circular.
I've also proved you have a very difficult time understanding English. The paper trail is very clear for anyone other than yourself to recognize. If you don't feel foolish yet by your writings, you never well.
Quote
But then again I'm a working photographer, whereas you take a few snaps now and again with minimal post work. Yet you ignorantly try and lecture me about my job.
You have done an excellent job making us understand your lack of understanding of image processing! You've done nothing to prove anything about your understanding of photography (thankfully). And no I've not lectured you one your job, only your inability to read and understand English or the factors surrounding non destructive editing.

**http://dpbestflow.org/image-editing/parametric-image-editing
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 06:15:38 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #43 on: March 19, 2014, 04:17:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Getting back OT, easy to dismiss your concepts for PSD: Make dutone as you desire, convert to RGB (or CMYK for output), done. Same color appearance, can save TIFF. No need for duotones.

And yet again, you do not get it. I re-edit my work and I do not flatten things because I like to keep all the editing options I can open.
And yet again you sir don't get it. You can create a Duotone with layers, make it look exactly as you wish, convert to RGB and you STILL have layers but now you can save as a TIFF. So we're back to topic and no, creating a Duotone look does not force you to save as a PSD.
You may be a fine photographer but in terms of understanding image processing and understanding the English language, you've got severe issues.
Quote
But then again I'm a working photographer, whereas you take a few snaps now and again with minimal post work.
You of course have absolutely no idea what I shoot or what I process nor how. The above new statement once again illustrates you're exhibiting troll like behavior. We'll add that silly statement to the insults you've thrown around these parts, all while accusing me of doing so. You really are a class act jjj or whoever you really are!
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 06:07:42 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jerryrock
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 563



WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 19, 2014, 06:51:08 PM »
ReplyReply

http://www.helpguide.org/mental/anger_management_control_tips_techniques.htm
Logged

Gerald J Skrocki
skrockidesign.com
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #45 on: March 19, 2014, 06:52:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Better for jjj would be:http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/non_destructive_imaging.pdf

But first: http://www.topmarks.co.uk/english-games/5-7-years/learning-to-read
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 06:54:48 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2014, 07:15:20 PM »
ReplyReply

And yet again you sir don't get it. You can create a Duotone with layers, make it look exactly as you wish, convert to RGB and you STILL have layers but now you can save as a TIFF. So we're back to topic and no, creating a Duotone look does not force you to save as a PSD.
I've said numerous times if doing that you lose the duotone information and cannot re-edit the toning. You really do not understand that I will often  rework my photographs and thus your workflow is useless for me. No matter how many times you post it. Once you convert to RGB, you cannot re-jig the toning.
Also having retaining layers is irrelevant to duo/tritones as no layers are involved.

Quote
You may be a fine photographer but in terms of understanding image processing and understanding the English language, you've got severe issues. You of course have absolutely no idea what I shoot or what I process nor how.
I have seen your website and the kind of work you have chosen to display. If that is not your best work then as where else would it be?

Quote
The above new statement once again illustrates you're exhibiting troll like behavior. We'll add that silly statement to the insults you've thrown around these parts, all while accusing me of doing so. You really are a class act jjj or whoever you really are!
My identity is not a secret and I have said numerous times on LuLa that I do not like anonymous posting.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2014, 07:43:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Better for jjj would be:http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/non_destructive_imaging.pdf
Good of you to link to that as it backs up my argument, not yours.
From said article as to the benefits of NDI
"As the capability of NDI through adjustment layers has grown, it has become possible to keep access to a virtually infinite number of variations of a particular file inside a single TIFF or Photoshop Document (PSD) file"
"By using layers and layer sets effectively, many different versions of an image can be stored in a single file. While different versions can be stored in a single document, only one version will be visible at one time. This composite is what you see in Photoshop and is used to build the preview at the time the file is saved.
"Unlimited undo: Since all image adjustments are saved simply as processing instructions, it’s easy to change those instructions to create a different interpretation of an image. In order to save the additional variations, all the user needs to do is to save the instructions that are used to create the variations."

Which describes the PS tools and methodology that I like to use - smart objects, adjustment layers, smart filters, blending modes, opacity..... All are a set of instructions which get applied to the screen display or when printing and all of which I can rejig or remove at any time and I have my untouched and pristine original image. The fact that you can do destructive editing in PS does not mean that a PS workflow is only destructive.
In fact I can simply use ACR on anything I want in PS and as that is the quintessential ND editing tool, how can you possibly claim you cannot work non destructively in PS?


Quote
Funny that I was always the best reader in class then. And more recently in script readings I was always the first to finish and still could recall more details and points about the writing than anyone else.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2014, 07:45:30 PM »
ReplyReply

I've said numerous times if doing that you lose the duotone information and cannot re-edit the toning.
Of course you can. But you have to do this in RGB mode. So what? Or, as I've said half a dozen times, WHEN YOU'RE DONE EDITING, convert (flatten, convert to RGB whatever). Save as TIFF, the origins of this topic you've dragged into a quagmire of your own misunderstandings.
Quote
Also having retaining layers is irrelevant to duo/tritones as no layers are involved.
Would you tell the 'other' JJJ who's so in love with Layers to return and comment? Wait, don't do that, he's as lost as you are.
Quote
I have seen your website and the kind of work you have chosen to display.
Being as ill equipped as you are to understand so much, might I point out that what you see on my web page in no way gives you any understanding of my work or how I process images. Not to make the stupid statement that you did (you take a few snaps now and again with minimal post work.). Bet you dollars to doughnuts I was working on commercial images in Photoshop long before you. That they are not on my web page doesn't change said facts!
Quote
If that is not your best work then as where else would it be?
Best work, no. And again, your mindless opinions about my work, which spans 3 decades and is absolutely not represented on my site illustrates you make statements and have opinions that are based on little or no actual, salient information. You're no more correct about my work, or how I edit my files as you are about image processing! You are very good at making assumptions without much data. Please tell me what images you looked at and where it is stated this is to be represented as my best work?
Quote
My identity is not a secret
Really? What's your full name? Where do you live? You've got a link to a web site which presumably, using the same faulty logic as you use, shows all the images you've ever produced, yet no information about you.
You're completely lost here. Your first post didn't add anything useful to the topic IMHO, you've been nasty and acting like a troll. You're so out of your league in terms of the technical aspects that you have to resort to pissing on my web images because you might actually recognize you haven’t made any senses or contribution to the topic. It really is time to move on. Or must you have the post locked due to your bad behavior?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2014, 07:47:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Good of you to link to that as it backs up my argument, not yours.
From said article as to the benefits of NDI
"As the capability of NDI through adjustment layers has grown, it has become possible to keep access to a virtually infinite number of variations of a particular file inside a single TIFF or Photoshop Document (PSD) file"
"By using layers and layer sets effectively, many different versions of an image can be stored in a single file. While different versions can be stored in a single document, only one version will be visible at one time. This composite is what you see in Photoshop and is used to build the preview at the time the file is saved.
"Unlimited undo: Since all image adjustments are saved simply as processing instructions, it’s easy to change those instructions to create a different interpretation of an image. In order to save the additional variations, all the user needs to do is to save the instructions that are used to create the variations."

Which describes the PS tools and methodology that I like to use - smart objects, adjustment layers, smart filters, blending modes, opacity..... All are a set of instructions which get applied to the screen display or when printing and all of which I can rejig or remove at any time and I have my untouched and pristine original image. The fact that you can do destructive editing in PS does not mean that a PS workflow is only destructive.
In fact I can simply use ACR on anything I want in PS and as that is the quintessential ND editing tool, how can you possibly claim you cannot work non destructively in PS?

Well I guess if you can't understand my writings, you have no hope of understanding Peter. No where does he say that Photoshop is a parametric editor! ACR like LR is. That you don't understand how ACR or LR opereates, and assume that ACR being a plug-in is like your layers or other NDI edits isn't surprising.

Quote
Funny that I was always the best reader in class then. And more recently in script readings I was always the first to finish and still could recall more details and points about the writing than anyone else.
You are a legend in your own mind.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 07:50:07 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #50 on: March 19, 2014, 07:51:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for admitting you completely missed my points and misread and missunderstood what I wrote.
Since I started the discussion on PS where I said you can only re-edit only if you do not flatten, it was you who changed the argument around.
Duotones and layer flattening were two separate topics not one.

Quote
Again, it's passed you by, there are no parametric edits in Photoshop** as there are in LR. And yes, it is totally old school bitmap editing. A term you seem to also misunderstand.
Have you even used PS this century? ACR, smart objects and all the other things I listed in post above are parametric. Even the paper you linked to says so. Are you going to now say Adobe are talking rubbish.

Quote
Nice try moving the discussion away from your misundersatndings! I've also proved you have a very difficult time understanding English.
You proved nothing other than how poor your reading is.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:37:50 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #51 on: March 19, 2014, 07:57:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Since I started the discussion on PS and said you can only re-edit only if you do not flatten, it was you who changed the argument around.
Duotones and layer flattening were two separate topics not one.
Try connecting the dots IF you can. You're wrong about both. Duotone's were mentioned because of lack of TIFF support. Not important. I've shown you how to save in TIFF and produce a Duotone appearing images. Now IF you find a printer who demands not RGB or CMYK but a Photoshop PSD saved as Duotone, well save as PSD. Go find that printer, we need to all talk to him! As for flattening, you 've missed the point from the very first post no matter how many times or how short the sentences are. You are still lost.
Quote
Have you even used PS this century?
This century and about 2 months after the first version was released (last century, 1990). You?
Quote
ACR, smart objects and all the other things I listed in post above are parametric.
ACR yes, you got that right, good guess. Otherwise no. You have to read everything over again or try your native language.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:21:36 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #52 on: March 19, 2014, 08:01:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Since I started the discussion on PS and said you can only re-edit only if you do not flatten, it was you who changed the argument around.
Funny, the first mention of Photoshop is Reply #2. Your first post was #25 (This will also make for a destructive workflow, something many of us like to avoid). Talk about selective reading, comprehension and memory!
Run away, you keep writing posts that make you look sillier.

Note: feel better with the 'since I started the discussion'? You still came here post #25, didn't add anything useful to the discussion.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:30:56 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #53 on: March 19, 2014, 08:07:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Well I guess if you can't understand my writings, you have no hope of understanding Peter. No where does he say that Photoshop is a parametric editor! ACR like LR is. That you don't understand how ACR or LR opereates, and assume that ACR being a plug-in is like your layers or other NDI edits isn't surprising.
My last post to you.
I've been working on and editing raw files in PS for many years, not rasterised files, raw files. So if PS is incapable of doing parametric editing that would be impossible wouldn't it? And all those other people like Julianne Kost and Russell Brown must also be making things up.

Julianne Kost - Learn Julieanne’s top 5 favorite features in Photoshop 13.1 including refinements to the Crop Tool, nondestructive editing with Blur Gallery and Liquify

From John Nack the [ex] product manager of Photoshop talking in 2005 - "So, the next time you hear someone crowing about non-destructive editing, remember that not only have we been doing this for the last three years with Camera Raw; we’re now taking it to a new level, letting you keep data intact while leveraging the unique power of the Photoshop tool set." There's also a link to Russel Brown demoing non-destructive editing in PS in the John Nack link.

So you are not only contradicting me, but also the guy who ran photoshop and the two most recognisable faces that promote and teach Photoshop.

Oh and quoting only part of a sentence to change it's meaning to suit yourself - nice try.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:11:59 PM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 19, 2014, 08:15:51 PM »
ReplyReply

My last post to you.
Now you're catching on!
Quote
I've been working on and editing raw files in PS for many years, not rasterised files, raw files. So if PS is incapable of doing parametric editing that would be impossible wouldn't it? And all those other people like Julianne Kost and Russell Brown must also be making things up.
Sure, so do this. Remove ACR from your computer and attempt to run it on those raw files using parametric edits. Not going to happen. ACR is a plug-in. Do I need to explan what that measn too?
Quote
Julianne Kost - Learn Julieanne’s top 5 favorite features in Photoshop 13.1 including refinements to the Crop Tool, nondestructive editing with Blur Gallery and Liquify
From John Nack the [ex] product manager of Photoshop talking in 2005 - "So, the next time you hear someone crowing about non-destructive editing, remember that not only have we been doing this for the last three years with Camera Raw; we’re now taking it to a new level, letting you keep data intact while leveraging the unique power of the Photoshop tool set." There's also a link to Russel Brown demoing non-destructive editing in PS in the John Nack link.
Just like Peter, neither are stating Photoshop is a parametric editor because it isn't. Only you seem to think it is. And you're wrong.
You probably will not understand this either: Go into a word processor, edit some text. Do a Save As and save that iteration (what Peter calls Derivative). That's a non destructive edit too. That you have again missed the difference between NDI and parametric editing is completely expected at this point.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #55 on: March 19, 2014, 08:37:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. I knew that you'd even claim that the people behind Photoshop were wrong.
BTW I never called PS a parametic editor as it can do both bitmap and non destructive editing [parametric] as stated and demonstrated by all the people who are the experts, but then what do they know?
I also don't do 'save as' in PS as my edits do not require it, being non-destructive and all.  Tongue

Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8981



WWW
« Reply #56 on: March 19, 2014, 08:48:04 PM »
ReplyReply

BTW I never called PS a parametic editor as it can do both bitmap and non destructive editing [parametric] as stated and demonstrated by all the people who are the experts, but then what do they know?
The 'other' JJJ who said he was done must have written this:
Quote
What also seems to have passed you by is that a lot of PS work can in fact be parametric, smart objects, smart filters, adjustment layers, not exactly old school bitmap editing is it?
You need to see a doctor because I think you may have a brain tumor. You done now?
Quote
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. I knew that you'd even claim that the people behind Photoshop were wrong.
No, just you. I've yet to see anything my friends John or Julieann have written that's wrong.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2014, 08:50:46 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
smahn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127


« Reply #57 on: March 19, 2014, 09:31:59 PM »
ReplyReply

you guys make a great case for maintaining one's anonymity on the internet. wouldn't your time be better spent gettin drunk or something?
Logged
daws
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


« Reply #58 on: March 19, 2014, 09:33:38 PM »
ReplyReply






"...Coming to bed, dear?"

"Right after I read the latest round in the ongoing tiff between the psd-off dudes on LuLa..."

 Grin




Logged
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2775


« Reply #59 on: March 19, 2014, 10:10:37 PM »
ReplyReply

the ongoing tiff

<groan/>  :-)
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad