Processing Program
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: curanzia versicherung, berufsunfähigkeits versicherung, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung für selbständige, berufsunfähigkeitsversicherung preis, versicherung vergleich,
Next: Why only 4.6MP?
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg on 25 Feb 2010 14:12 tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > I have yet to see/use an intuitive software program. The only intitive interface in the world is the human nipple --- and a full third of the babies have to *learn* that interface! The best a *program* can do is to conform to common assumptions about how things work --- and even there it's learned reactions and asssumptions and they differ from person to person. > Something that > is intuitive is something that anticipates what you want to do and > directs you to or takes you to the next step. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(philosophy) disagrees with that description, as do I. You describe not an intuitive interface to a program, you describe a mind reading program. Actually, the latter may be easier to accomplish than the former: humans are creatures of habit, and it's often not too hard to extract the most likely action(s) by observing past behaviour and using statistics or neuronal networks. > Image processing software doesn't do that. It could, if you wanted it to. But would a software that's correct in 80% of the time what you want to do outweight one where you'd have to tell it to undo and please do what you want in 20% of the time --- i.e. causing you to have to stop, consider the current state, and act upon that state instead of always using the long learned actions which are already in muscle memory? Imagine writing a posting and every 5th word you need to go back and correct the word because the program guessed wrong ... -Wolfgang
From: Cal Rollins on 25 Feb 2010 18:23 On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:12:28 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg <ozcvgtt02(a)sneakemail.com> spewed his ignorance thusly: >tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >> I have yet to see/use an intuitive software program. > >The only intitive interface in the world is the human nipple >--- and a full third of the babies have to *learn* that interface! > >The best a *program* can do is to conform to common assumptions >about how things work --- and even there it's learned reactions >and asssumptions and they differ from person to person. > >> Something that >> is intuitive is something that anticipates what you want to do and >> directs you to or takes you to the next step. > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(philosophy) >disagrees with that description, as do I. > >You describe not an intuitive interface to a program, you describe >a mind reading program. Actually, the latter may be easier to >accomplish than the former: humans are creatures of habit, and >it's often not too hard to extract the most likely action(s) by >observing past behaviour and using statistics or neuronal networks. > >> Image processing software doesn't do that. > >It could, if you wanted it to. But would a software that's correct >in 80% of the time what you want to do outweight one where you'd >have to tell it to undo and please do what you want in 20% of the >time --- i.e. causing you to have to stop, consider the current >state, and act upon that state instead of always using the long >learned actions which are already in muscle memory? > >Imagine writing a posting and every 5th word you need to go back >and correct the word because the program guessed wrong ... > Let us all know where to show up for your Wikigraduation, where you get your Wikidiploma from your Wikiprofessors. Your whole education authored by moronic people who write wikipages all day and night in an attempt to prove to themselves and their mothers upstairs that they really aren't losers. After having spewed their ignorance upon many wikipages they then find a purpose in life in guarding and defending that their ignorance and their ignorance alone remains on their wikipages 24/7/52. Cross-referenced of course with wikipages displaying the same ignorance where they obtained their own Wikidiplomas. Sometimes when bored I'll refer everyone to a wikipage right after I have edited it with some outlandish nonsense, even more silly than what that page originally contained, just to see how stupid they all are. The wikipage-author will change it back to their spewed stupidity within a day anyway, unless they have died in their basement. An entertainment of double-duty. Do people always hold their forefinger and thumb in this shape "L" and wave to you in that manner? If not, they should all be doing just that. Perhaps one of them will take pity on you and tell you what it means someday.
From: nospam on 25 Feb 2010 18:30 In article <dm1eo59aj624t6m7p02m3mj3tg259kb73t(a)4ax.com>, J. Caldwell <nospam(a)anyserver.net> wrote: > >In a nutshell, for raw shooters, GIMP is a no go until they release the > >32 bits version (non beta). > > I guess that's why everyone was using PhotoSlop for the last decade with > its 16-bit platform, only changed to a 32-bit math platform in CS4. wrong. > They > could have all been running it on Windows 3.1 all these years and they > wouldn't have noticed any difference, other than it would have ran faster. nonsense > Boy are you ever ignorant to what's really happening, aren't you. yes, you are
From: R Davis on 25 Feb 2010 18:50 On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:59:02 -0000, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >"ray" <ray(a)zianet.com> wrote in message >news:7unpnrFb4lU25(a)mid.individual.net... >> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:47:57 +0000, David J Taylor wrote: >[] >> Maybe you're using the wrong OS ;) > >What OS you use isn't the point, as I tried to indicate. If you are using >Windows, you expect the programs to behave like Windows programs, equally >if you are using a Mac OS, or if you are using Linux you expect a basic >familiarity with the software. The problems arise when a program designed >for one OS is ported to another without due consideration for the >conventions of the new OS. > >If someone finds GIMP suits their natural way of working, that's great. >Like a number of other posters, I did not. > >Cheers, >David That's one of the nice things about Photoline. You can configure every last command in that program to any short-cut key combo of your choice. If you've had a favorite way of running other editors you can do the same in Photoline. You can even design your own right-click context menus in it, variable depending on if you are right-clicking on a layer, background image, or the workspace. But then, Photoline has so many more commands and features than programs like photoslop, there's a good 80% or more of them that they'll have to learn even what they are used for before they can think of assigning a keypress to them. Just the 33 adjustment layer types alone will have them confused. If they design their own adjustment-layer types using the "custom" option, to create their own library of adjustment layers ... well, let's just say they'd have a lot of learning and growing up to do.
From: nospam on 25 Feb 2010 18:54
In article <dj2eo5hocnp5o4ab97bnj91b15vq7j12mg(a)4ax.com>, R Davis <spamless(a)anon.com> wrote: > That's one of the nice things about Photoline. You can configure every last > command in that program to any short-cut key combo of your choice. same with photoshop. |