posted on Jul, 9 2007 @ 03:29 PM
Originally posted by zorgon
Sorry ArMaP... but if that were true then all the Forensic labs, the military image enhancers etc would all be invalid. Raw data is just that RAW...
needing to be processed so we can better see and interpret what is there. Have you ever seen what the FBI and CIA can do with fuzzy, blurry poor
quality images of people in video cams? They can get a clear reconizable image that stands up in court.
OK, maybe I didn't explain it in the
One of the things the "Levels" option in Photoshop can do is change the contrast, but it shows the histogram of the selected area (or of all the
image, is nothing is selected) and so it lets us choose the best maximum and minimum levels without loosing any data
. If we choose we can
disregard some of the data, but Photoshop lets us be in charge of what we do, while changing only the contrast, usually, does not show that we may be
loosing detail in favour of a better contrast.
So, the "treatment" I give my images may give me exactly the same result as that of blue bird
, but at least I know that I did not loose any
data, while I don't know in what way blue bird
changed the contrast of those images. That is why I said "not necessarily", changing the
contrast may give better results but it may also give bad results.
And I don't think that the FBI and the CIA only change the contrast to give them better images.