Post the raw files. Simple.
Post the raw files. Simple.
@DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:i post a simple image
That's the problem, you haven't. A screenshot isn't the images we need to see. Pushing JPEGs much?
dont you read my posts ? iso 4000 raw processed no adjustments. iso 100 pushed to reach the same brightness as the iso 4000 image. the difference is in the shadows. WB is also off shooting underexposed.
Post the raw files. Simple.
if you cant see the replicated results its not my problem. a6300 and a74
@Robert1955 has written: @DonaldB has written: @AlanSh has written:Please can you stop this sniping at each other. It just pisses the rest of us off.
Alan
pisses me off more, i post a simple image and expect questions and answers related to my image . not some primary school crap all the time. is it so god dam hard to have a sensible conversation on this site without all the garbage thrown in ?
but your images are not that simple. The lightness difference is far smaller than you would expect with the ISO difference. So asking what processing was done is a fair question which could be answered by providing actual jpg's with complete exif
can you not read ? iso 4000 raw processed no adjustments. iso 100 pushed to reach the same brightness as the iso 4000 image. the difference is in the shadows. WB is also off shooting underexposed.
That does not tell me much about what you actually did in processing. Which slider is “push”?
its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4
That does not tell me much about what you actually did in processing. Which slider is “push”?
It tells nothing at all as the raw files are not provided. IMHO best to ignore the screenshots.
@WolfsHead has written:We are fortunate to have some unquestioned experts in the field of digital imaging - but they shouldn’t be let anywhere near anything with ‘beginner’ in the title!
Interesting point of view. You mean that beginners shouldn't have the opportunity to learn from people who actually know their stuff?
As my uncle “Don” said… “You know too much.”
@bobn2 has written: @WolfsHead has written:We are fortunate to have some unquestioned experts in the field of digital imaging - but they shouldn’t be let anywhere near anything with ‘beginner’ in the title!
Interesting point of view. You mean that beginners shouldn't have the opportunity to learn from people who actually know their stuff?
As my uncle “Don” said… “You know too much.”
I'll take “You know too much” over "You know too little, and most of it wrong" :)
@DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4
bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
Why? How have you experienced read noise difference?
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.
@DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.
all good i found the graph ,that i apparently couldnt the other night.
[]
(/a/705krRdqxOkDmlVSJ2V9XcC87NNp9lKsPa4Ga1Pa5JVgFbhgYyYU1dOEuDt0TcVG/5882/?shva=1)
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.all good i found the graph ,that i apparently couldnt the other night.
[
]
(/a/705krRdqxOkDmlVSJ2V9XcC87NNp9lKsPa4Ga1Pa5JVgFbhgYyYU1dOEuDt0TcVG/5882/?shva=1)
Neither of those is corrected for resolution. That's not Bill's problem, but if you would apply the appropriate corrections it might explain what you're seeing in your images.
Oh, never mind. Those two cameras have the same resolution.
Also, are you sure you're looking at RN in your images and not shot noise? I think that's worth your looking at.
Also, pay attention to the open symbols.
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.all good i found the graph ,that i apparently couldnt the other night.
[
]
(/a/705krRdqxOkDmlVSJ2V9XcC87NNp9lKsPa4Ga1Pa5JVgFbhgYyYU1dOEuDt0TcVG/5882/?shva=1)
I'll repeat my question:
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4
And post the raw files already.
@DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.all good i found the graph ,that i apparently couldnt the other night.
[
]
(/a/705krRdqxOkDmlVSJ2V9XcC87NNp9lKsPa4Ga1Pa5JVgFbhgYyYU1dOEuDt0TcVG/5882/?shva=1)Neither of those is corrected for resolution. That's not Bill's problem, but if you would apply the appropriate corrections it might explain what you're seeing in your images.
Oh, never mind. Those two cameras have the same resolution.
Also, are you sure you're looking at RN in your images and not shot noise? I think that's worth your looking at.
Also, pay attention to the open symbols.
i can shoot the a74 in crop mode it still produces a cleaner image, will do some tests toninght when its dark and i can stretch the DR to max.
@DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written: @IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:its not my problem
Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4bills graphs show that the a6300 has less read noise than the a74 , thats not what ive experienced.
I'm asking about www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4 - specifically.
Don't look at other graphs or comparisons, it's too early, you need to come to grips with fundamentals first.all good i found the graph ,that i apparently couldnt the other night.
[
]
(/a/705krRdqxOkDmlVSJ2V9XcC87NNp9lKsPa4Ga1Pa5JVgFbhgYyYU1dOEuDt0TcVG/5882/?shva=1)I'll repeat my question:
@IliahBorg has written:Please explain what Bill is doing wrong:
www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR_Shadow.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7M4And post the raw files already.
will post some raw links tonight when its dark so i can stretch the DR to max
will post some raw links tonight when its dark so i can stretch the DR to max
No. These ones, from previous:
dprevived.com/media/attachments/e8/5d/1jMe9EhrHCA4OoBQ5oWKI9zeaumQm1zgY5t2kCv7VJOj7I52EIafAuum0CcoZl4Z/test-shot-noise.jpg
@DonaldB has written:will post some raw links tonight when its dark so i can stretch the DR to max
No. These ones, from previous:
dprevived.com/media/attachments/e8/5d/1jMe9EhrHCA4OoBQ5oWKI9zeaumQm1zgY5t2kCv7VJOj7I52EIafAuum0CcoZl4Z/test-shot-noise.jpg
just sent link via PM, please do not share but post your converted cropped images for discussion.
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:will post some raw links tonight when its dark so i can stretch the DR to max
No. These ones, from previous:
dprevived.com/media/attachments/e8/5d/1jMe9EhrHCA4OoBQ5oWKI9zeaumQm1zgY5t2kCv7VJOj7I52EIafAuum0CcoZl4Z/test-shot-noise.jpgjust sent link via PM, please do not share but post your converted cropped images for discussion.
Facts and experiments are discussed publicly and in a fully transparent manner.
I'm refusing to download the images that are the subject of discussion here if I can't share them.
Limiting the discussion to converted crops is also unacceptable.