removed
April 2, 2023
284
-
-
it paints over bad data with AI generated good data 😁
-
Wrong answer.
-
replaces 🙄
why do all editing programs use a paintbrush, pen, marker ect symbol . must drive you guys nuts, can you sleep at night not knowing that its not a real tool ?
-
It is a real tool but it does not recover real detail.
-
you missed my point completely. re read my first post. i hate the post layout you wouldnt know what you are replying to. it just creates confusion.
-
Wrong answer.
-
He didn't. Rather, you did.
-
The layout works pretty well unless there's a huge number of lingering quotations, which I've seen literally a couple of times on this site so far, mostly following silly amounts of back-and-forth quotations with no trimming at all (which old-timer Usenet users would do but this is the eternal September after all).
-
Exposure is very simple. It is the amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
When using flash you have 2 exposures* to deal with - the ambient exposure* and the flash exposure*. Shutter speeds slower than the flash sync speed will affect only the ambient exposure*, not the flash exposure*.
If using HSS then shutter speed will affect the flash exposure* as well.
If you need to be taken seriously then you need to explain in your own words what changes in the raw data if the sensor's sensitivity changes as you claim.
ISO does not affect the sensor's sensitivity because for a given scene lighting, aperture and shutter speed the number of photons a sensor's pixel/photosite sees at ISO 100 will be the same as the number of photons seen with ISO 6400. Raising ISO does not enable the sensor to somehow 'suck' in more photons/light from the scene. It will just make the same amount of noise more visible.
* exposure - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open
** optimal exposure - the maximum exposure* within dof and motion blur requirements without clipping important highlights.
*** under exposed - more exposure* could have been added with the DOF and blur constraints still being met without clipping important highlights. -
That is a problem that we all have. There is so much material on the web, from supposedly authoritative sources on the subject of exposure which is just wrong. Then there is a large group of unknowing photographers that unwittingly absorb that information and as a result end up with a mental model of photography that simply doesn't work. Then there's another group of photographers that wrongly believe themselves to be knowledgable. propagate the errors and even go as far as to try to defend the errors from the people trying to help beginner photographers onto a path which will allow their understanding to grow.
That would be you.
Obviously the exposure is controlled by the luminous energy over the exposure time. In the case of a long exposure with a flash in the middle, the light from the flash adds to the exposure. The extent to which the shutter or the flash dominate the resulting exposure depends on the relative light power of them. It's not a problem with the definition of exposure, it's a problem with exposure not being as simple and obvious as trianglists would like to pretend (mainly because they don't have enough understanding to even grasp the basics, yet alone the more involved situations). And I should note there, unless anyone gets hot under the collar, I'm not referring to any individual there, only a hypothetical group of people that I call 'trianglists' who have unfortunately based their understanding of photography on the triangle and as a result understand very little.
But not in direct relation to the ISO setting. On a car the accelerator/throttle control controls the throttle. On a modern car it will also affect the ignition timing, the mixture and possibly also the valve timing and the induction tract length. It would not be useful to tell learner drivers that the accelerator was an ignition timing control to the exclusion of it major function.
Absolutely and completely incorrect. Now your turn to dooooo some homework Try reading up about mic sensitivity.
Sort out your knowledge of how microphones work before lecturing others to try to get them to adopt your faulty ideas of how sensors work.
-
my understanding of microphones is very accurate I've just set my daughter up with a complete recording studio . i think i know a little more about recording live music than you . next your going to tell me your a qualified sound engineer like my daughter. have you even played with complex recording studio software and mix a track with 7 instruments in a studio ? or even know how to correctly stereo record an acoustic guitar ?
-
You haven't posted anything that suggests that is even remotely true.
-
child.
the young lady in the back lit photo i posted is my daughter . -
Maybe she, maybe she isn't. It's irrelevant because I cannot verify who took the photo and it certainly doesn't prove you know much about sound recording.
-
You guys are spamming the forum very successfully now. 🤦
-
Just because you say it is doesn't make it so. You clearly know very little about microphones at all.
Which means nothing at all - just that you have the cash available and can read catalogues.
Very possibly, but you know .... all about microphones.
-
how ? by quoting articles from all the major camera manufacturer's ? do you really think ALL of them are wrong including Sony ? they make the majority of sensors.
