You left out the part that said...
Take your pick. You can argue endlessly, which will usually involve a lot of repetition of the same basic points framed differently; give up after you've made your points and allow the topic of contention (or sometimes competition) to wither away; or ignore it and move on with life. Some may find more creative alternatives to those basic options outlined.
"This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put." -- Winston Churchill😁
not you Jim just the other members that constantly mock my findings.
“Keep Buggering on” - - Winston Churchill
I wonder why you keep saying that being fully aware it isn't true.
BTW, have you read www.fastrawviewer.com/white-balance-as-per-channel-exposure-correction ?
Im not ashamed about my poor English writing skills 😎 but jim has also stated he hasnt played with any of the latest sony cameras . not that i really matters because my a6300 shows the same histogram accuracy as my a74.
post a link please specifically relating to histogram accuracy.
I think this is one of the few cases where 'don't you know how to use Google?' is apposite.
no one has a detailed article showing actual on camera images of histograms and direct software histograms or even colour picker samples from photoshop clearly showing the almost whites at 253 to 255 from 16 bit files.i have posted numerous with highly accurate comparisons.
already read that.
frv quote.
One might say that inaccurate white balance is no longer a problem since Auto white balance is quite accurate now. However, in RAW data there is no way to differentiate between the colors present in the scene and the color of the light hitting it. Because of that, if an object in the scene has some saturated colour, usually a shade of red or blue, applying white balance may result in a false overexposure warning.
Have you ever heard of Russell's Teapot?
Look in the second Lenrentals raw exposure post, if you haven’t already.
I am not following. In M with Auto-ISO mode, applying positive EC will increase ISO, not decrease it.
Your DR will not increase when lowering ISO if your exposure is constant.
Just read that , your findings 1/2 stop accuracy and yet you quote "if you are shooting RAW, it is worse - the histogram misleads when it comes to exposure of the highlights and shadows." misleading is not a word that describes your findings.
i have got the accuracy down to 1/10 of a stop. and depending what side of the in cameras 1/3 stop accuracy setting is totally irrelevant.
now where the zebras blow any histogram away for consistent accuracy is the ability to set them (70) lets say skin tones. to exactly the users required brightness level.
edit, there is no camera histogram images.
