Anthony Farr wrote:
My point is that the profile needs to be applied before the data enters the
digital domain, early in the a/d conversion. It needn't matter that the
voltage rise is squared (if that's what you mean) as the brightness rises,
as long as it's a constant and predictable
Oh. I see. Why?
Regards,
Anthony Farr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ryan
Brooks
Sent: Friday, 18 August 2006 11:37 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
Anthony Farr wrote
Anthony Farr wrote:
Oh. I see. Why?
Because, you've obviously figure out something that electrical engineers
and physicists have missed for 20 years. Congrats!
-Ryan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
it's not done that way or
because it won't work.
Regards,
Anthony Farr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ryan
Brooks
Sent: Saturday, 19 August 2006 12:32 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Anthony Farr
Sent: Saturday, 19 August 2006 1:22 AM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
Not at all. In fact I don't know the working of an a/d converter beyond
At 10:31 PM 8/17/2006, you wrote:
I definitely agree that tonal gradation is funky on cameras like the
*istDS, when compared to what the human eye sees. Last year, I traveled to
Pittsburgh for their annual Light Up Night festival. (One night a year,
they turn on almost every light in almost
I don't know what these grayscales and step wedges are supposed to be
showing me.
G
On Aug 17, 2006, at 7:31 PM, Anthony Farr wrote:
Perhaps this post didn't get through the first time so I'm
resending it but
with an altered subject line. I can understand how some of us
might be
Glad it's not just me.
I thought I was being dense.
Dave
On 8/18/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know what these grayscales and step wedges are supposed to be
showing me.
G
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
My takeaway was that it was underexposed. Other than that, I got nothng.
Paul
On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:47 PM, David Savage wrote:
Glad it's not just me.
I thought I was being dense.
Dave
On 8/18/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know what these grayscales and step wedges
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: Friday, 18 August 2006 12:44 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
I don't know what these grayscales and step wedges are supposed
On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:31 PM, Anthony Farr wrote:
Perhaps this post didn't get through the first time so I'm resending
it but
with an altered subject line.
I didn't reply because there was no context to what I was looking at,
so it didn't make any sense to me.
-Aaron
--
PDML
Anthony Farr wrote:
You need to click the DETAILS tab under the image to show the caption.
PhotoNet would rather show you an advertisement when the page first loads.
What the scales show is that an unmanipulated linear greyscale produced by a
digital camera has considerably darker shadows
-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:31 PM, Anthony Farr wrote:
Perhaps this post didn't get through the first time so I'm resending
it but
with an altered subject line.
I didn't reply because there was no context to what I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul
Stenquist
Sent: Friday, 18 August 2006 12:55 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
My takeaway was that it was underexposed. Other than
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
Except that the sensor is linear- if it's a CCD anyway. It's a photo
(okay, electron) counter. If you digitize the output in a non-linear
space, you're not getting as much (good) information
It's all about how our eyes see versus how sensors see. The sensor may
technically be correct, but I want to photograph things the way that I see.
Me too. But the data coming from the _physics_ of the CCD is linear.
Nothing you can do about that unless you change the sensor technology.
it's outputting is voltages. Can't the conversion be profiled?
Regards,
Anthony Farr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ryan
Brooks
Sent: Friday, 18 August 2006 1:22 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation
PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
It's all about how our eyes see versus how sensors see. The sensor may
technically be correct, but I want to photograph things the way that I
see.
Me too. But the data coming from
List
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
Except that the sensor is linear- if it's a CCD anyway. It's a photo
(okay, electron) counter. If you digitize the output in a non-linear
space, you're not getting as much (good) information as if it was a
linear digitization
Yet another observation. Every time anyone adjusts curves or tweaks the
levels in Photoshop, what they are really doing is changing their digital
image from a linear rendition to a non-linear rendition.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Regards,
Anthony Farr
--
PDML
Anthony Farr wrote:
Yet another observation. Every time anyone adjusts curves or tweaks the
levels in Photoshop, what they are really doing is changing their digital
image from a linear rendition to a non-linear rendition.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Even before
Subject: Re: Tonal gradation in shadows - The $67 Question?
Anthony Farr wrote:
Another thought. Why would converting the linear CCD output to
non-linear
A/D output have not as much (good) information? I could understand
this
if the CCD was outputting digital information and arbitrarily
22 matches
Mail list logo
