On Dec 30, 2013, at 1:03 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> Does it sounds crazy? :) >> >> It's a bit over the edge. In my opinion, a trained eye can probably do a >> better job of image evaluation than can any software. > > Indeed a trained eye (and brain) would be able to make a more > informed decision than a simple-minded algorithm. However even the > eye must use some tools in its assessment. For example a person uses > eye-glasses to aid sight, and this is exactly what I'm trying to find: > a special pair of "eye-glasses" that highlight which parts of the > image are in focus, etc. > > I don't necessarily want a solution that spits out a number and > says "photo (A) is 10% better than photo (B)". I'm just looking for a > solution that "prepares" photo (A) and (B) to ease my evaluation. Work harder at training your eye. That will do much more to ease your evaluation. And don't shoot so many frames of a single image. When shooting RAW you don't have to be dead on with exposure as long as you don't clip the whites or blacks excessively. In regard to focus, if an image appears to be in focus at 100% rendering, it's in focus. Paul > > Ciprian. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
