Please define "pixel peeping".

Started May 14, 2013 | Discussions thread
jackdan Contributing Member • Posts: 896
Bingo!

dsjtecserv wrote:

leno wrote:

dsjtecserv wrote:

leno wrote:

dsjtecserv wrote:

Gary Fischman wrote:

Pixel peeping is the questionable practice of worrying about individual pixels of an image, and not actually looking at the image itself.

Actually, its the ability to see both the forest and the trees, and use both inputs to optimize the quality of the results.

Dave

No Pixel peeping is only applied to those who have lost perspective and not rational about what they are looking at.

Then it is, by your description, a tautology. Pixel peeping isn't looking at pixels, its looking at pixels more than I would. Kind of like saying that anyone who drives slower than me is a piker, while anyone who drives faster than me is a wacko.

In fact, inspection of both a picture as a whole, and at various levels of detail, is a very good way to judge the quality of the image, as well as the characteristics of the system that produced it. An image is comprised of details, and the quality and properties of those details affect the final image. Dismissing the use of 100% viewing as a component of image evaluation, or to learn more about the equipment or processes that made it, is itself a photographic sin, and could be equated with glorifying ignorance.

Dave

No that does not apply, the term pixel peeping should only be applied to those who peek a pixels as if that was an end to itself. What you are describing is a rational action by somebody has command of their senses, I don't know what it might be called but it's not pixel peeping.

Yeah, but that's precisely the problem. You (and others; I'm not intending to single you out) want to ascribe a pejorative term to people who, in your view, are excessively preoccupied with looking closely at images. But in the process you stain the act of looking closely at images, itself, without providing any benchmark for how much is too much. In the end it just become a rhetorical weapon; a way to malign someone who has drawn a conclusion you don't like. It actively discourages people from using close inspection effectively and creatively, and encourages a "don't bother me with the science" attitude. I just think that's regrettable, and cringe every time I see the "pixel peeper" bomb thrown.

Well said, and that pretty much says all that needs to be said.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow