Please define "pixel peeping".

Started May 14, 2013 | Discussions thread
dsjtecserv Veteran Member • Posts: 3,765
Re: Please define "pixel peeping".
4

BobT wrote:

OK.  This has developed into an almost heated debate.  Didn't expect that.  But should have, I guess.

Don't know if anyone is game for this, or if this is even possible, BUT....could anyone post a "pixel peeped" image showing a good image and also a bad image noted as a result of their pixel peeping?

I for one, would like to see such an example.

Thanks

Bob, this is exactly what concerns me and gives rise to my earlier response. It isn't the "looking close" that people want to derisively refer to as "pixel-peeping", but rather the the irrational obsession with it, to the exclusion of other means of evaluation. So it doesn't make sense to try to find an individual picture that has either suffered or benefited from close inspection. Any picture may (or may not) be enhanced by the information gained from close inspection, and certainly people can make bad decisions based on close inspections (as they can from any other type of inspection). It isn't the action of looking closely that is objectionable, but the attitude of people who rely on it excessively, or who use it as weapon in rhetorical internet jousts.

Looking closely at pixels, even at 100%, isn't a sin and be quite useful, though it may or may not produce tangible benefit. The beef is with the misuse, overuse, or preoccupation with that.

Dave

 dsjtecserv's gear list:dsjtecserv's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow