The Exposure Triangle Is Misleading And Unnecessary.

Especially at the size of the image on the webpage. Sensors with large-scale correlated post-gain read noise blotches that are still visible after significant downsizing are mostly history these days. Intended display magnification can be a useful consideration when making read_noise/headroom compromises.

Many manufacturers also have options that give more headroom without making the OOC JPEGs, EVF, and review images darker, like Canon's HTP.

Well, maybe it depends on your specialty. Mine was power - electric machines and power electronics.

I learned about Poisson noise on my own.

can you hear your image noise ?

Can you see pink acoustic noise?

correct exposure /brightness for a given subject can only be determined buy looking at the subject with your eyes and comparing the image on your viewing medium. no file information is going to tell you what the correct exposure or brightness is, was or should be period.

is it radio frequency noise or interference !

Not true for raw files, unless you have very strange criteria for "correct".

If you're just going to be silly, find someone else to play with.

If you're just going to be silly, find someone else to play with.
[/quote]

It's been one continuous troll since the beginning.

Rich

define noise ! so noise has how may meanings ?

very strange YOUR eyes, or do you see with something else?

It's been one continuous troll since the beginning.

Rich
[/quote]
so you call it a troll because you cant answer a simple question ?

seriously dont you have any idea how to profile a printer calibrate your monitor ,calibrate your evf, calibrate your lcd. so that the subject looks the same on all those mediums as the subject in real life ! is this to hard to understand ?

I disagree.

First of all it appears your definition of exposure is how light or dark an image looks on whatever medium it is on. That's fine, many people have that misconception and we live with that.

When I set exposure* the final image lightness is not even a consideration at that stage. I set the widest aperture that gives my DOF and the slowest shutter speed that meets my blur constraints without clipping important highlights. The camera can set ISO wherever it likes as long as important highlights are not clipped. I set the final image lightness in post.

This way I have maximised the exposure* for the photo I want and maximised the quality of the raw data because the SNR has been maximised.

I don't need a triangle or any other shape to maximise the quality of the raw data.

* 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.

How do you profile your printer?

How did you calibrate your monitor?

How did you profile your monitor assuming you are aware profiling your monitor is a separate task to calibrating it?

do you understand how misleading all these posts are. i was sitting here having a coffee and took an image of my coffee mug then loaded the image on my computer ,looked at via my calibrated screen and then compared them, and guess what just by magic without looking at the raw file on some irrelevant software , went wow that exposure/brightness of my image MATCHES my coffee mug. thats how you determine correct exposure/image brightness period. i have 6 monitors 4 computer screens and a pro printer prints that all look the same. because i have calibrated them all with my eyes. wow is that what our eyes are used for 🙄who ever would have thought. oh and how ridiculous raw viewer said my exposure was 10 stops from clipping 😂😂😂 big deal that was helpfull

Which sentences do you find misleading?