The Beginners Questions Area

"extra layer." Pun intended, dual gain electronics, i nearly wet myself laughing how it was implemented. thats gold.

you made the right choice .as my daughter always says my English is pathetic. but i can lift heavy fings 😁
Best part is ,i need not enter into these discussions anymore. I have my answers..
glad you implemented open discussions on these forums without locking them like DPR. much appreciated.

Where is the "simple photo diode op amp circuit"? And "sort"? What does that mean?

That's BS. The first image has clear visible noise and in the second you increased the exposure* by a little over 4 stops, so of course there will be less visible noise. Any modern reputable camera will have less visible noise when you increase the exposure*

* 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.

He said, "a detector." The human eye is a detector and one of the impacts of a low SNR on visual observation is difficulty detecting low-contrast extended objects.

My old Prof. “Doc” Williams always maintained that the acronym BS meant Brilliant Statistics. lol

hmmmmm.......I always thought it meant "Beautifully Silly" or "Boringly Silly", not sure which 🤔

Ummm, yum wats up doc's.

Tell you what us real simple plain old people do down here on earth. We gets that EVF eye thingy in a mirrorless body off auto stuff. Then what we does do, is get it to look right and then just goes to ourselves..........

Yeah that looks real fine, click, click, click.Try dat, works mighty fine.

Ehhh, dats all folks.

Dunny...... Oops I mean Danny.

i was referring to noun categories, open the link , as ive been saying forever ,exposure has many meanings. and the major companies use the one that's most fitting for the majority to understand.

So what? Of course the word exposure can have different meanings. Some will say it's how light or dark an image looks and others will give the correct technical definition - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.

If I went up to any camera manufacturer's engineers and said I can change the image lightness in camera without altering the exposure* at all, they will say yep, that is correct. You don't have to change the exposure* to make an image lighter or darker. It really is as simple as that 😄

Marketing/sales people and technical writers not fully understanding the basic 101 concepts of photography will write in manuals words to the effect of exposure being how light or dark an image looks, which is wrong and not even technically correct.

* 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.

Very cool! A friend of mine owns a business selling racing memorabilia and ended up with Mark's Indy 500 winning driver's suit. Apparently Mark got into an accident at Road Atlanta later in the season and broke his leg so the leg of the suit was cut off, but a corner worker ended up with the whole suit somehow. My friend used some of the images in one of my books to ID it as that suit. Bought it for 1k, flipped it for 15k.

we can. but embarrassment doesn't fit into it...

how can you get embarrassed over a discussion on the relevance of the term exposure in 2023. it went out practical use with the advent of in-camera metering systems 50 years ago. shutter+apeture+iso is relevant today. funny how fixed asa/iso is never brought up in the discussions.

He might have been referring to when you made a fool out of yourself when you started a thread asking which of the 2 histograms you posted in the op was the raw histogram when in fact neither of them was a histogram of the actual raw data.

Also "shutter+apeture+iso", as you mentioned, is relevant if the goal is a nice looking sooc jpeg.

ISO is not relevant if the goal is to maximise the quality of the raw data.

It's not relevant the way DonaldB claims it too be, but the ISO setting is relevant to maximising the quality of the raw data, as long as your camera isn't ISO-invariant.

Yes, technically you are correct but with the type of photos I take, ISO's affect on dynamic range and read noise is negligible, hence not relevant for me.

The amount of exposure* is by far the largest influence on the quality of the raw data.

Since you are using Auto-ISO you may not notice it, but for many cameras, the dual conversion gain helps with noise in shadows.