Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
If PI had the interface of an iPhone it would be a truly awesome piece of software.
Its the interface I feel is where it is let down. Photoshop with its slider approach, does not really require much of an understanding of how the tool works as you can see the effect by moving the sliders.
Also needlessly complex terminology. You would need to spend a long time on the net getting definitions for technical words if you wanted to delve deeply into it.
Greg.
|
Greg ,
Did you view the presentation, really worth looking at even if your not a PI user
The signal processing architecture of Startools really caught my eye. The user or operational interface to me was a secondary factor ( even though Startools only requires minimal key stroke operations or mouse operations to achieve a solid outcome , no levels , no curves or complex tweaks etc... )
PI has a signal processing architecture similar to the following -
Source Data> input > Operation 1 > input > Operation 2 > input Operation 3 and so on .....to final image
In PI, the input is not saved and utilised as important usable data in subsequent Operations.
In Startools all input data is saved and used between all signal processing Operations , so it keeps a permanent record of all processes , like time travel until the final noise reduction where tracking is switched off and a final processed image is completed.
Yes, this signal processing architecture did require volumes of complex and detailed algorithms to allow signal evolution tracking but the developer Ivo , did it and it works incredibly well
Cheers
Martin