From: Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Full headers:
From: "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:52:14 -0400
Organization: NNTP Server
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <ot77bm$6k2$>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <ot5giq$1mtk$> <> <ot5lh5$1tq5$> <> <ot5rs9$60q$> <> <ot68r3$bb9$>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Print Article
Forward Article
"John McWilliams"<> wrote

Listen to The Duck. He knows whereof he speaks. Me, I worked only on V2
and 3 of LR.....

What is it I said that you disagree with?

That saving out of LR to JPG is lossy?

That images coming from the camera as JPG
have lost data?

That a JPG is actually a bitmap stored in a
compressed file format?

Did you actually read what I wrote? I was never
questioning SD's methods or his explanations
about LR.

  I've agreed over and over that the process LR
uses can be used to edit the image without loss,
inside LR. All I'm saying is that it's important to
recognize that LR is not somehow magically
transcending the limitations of JPG. It's merely
storing data about edits.