Scene luminance has nothing to do with exposure.

has nothing to do with it.

I'm afraid I disagree with you.
Don Cox

The "original triangle" must be the one in Peterson's book.
I think that as soon as you introduce triangles or trinities, mysticism arrives, followed by theological wrangles.

Don Cox

pretty much. 'aperture, shutter speed and iso. they are all i record on the camera when i test a new studio setup. i dont even record my 7 studio lights settings anymore as i have them diffused and spaced at exactly the places i need them for the required amount of light. scene luminance is such a waist of brain space and its not practically recordable anyway in my situation. if scene luminence was important you would have included it in your software exif data 😎

You don't have the book, do you?

No

LOL google is your friend, his book is referenced many times. go do your homework.

Ah, the ever-popular suck-it-and-see approach! No brain-space waisted at all ... and, presumably, not a single light-meter to be seen in your professional studio, unlike here:

stolen from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_meter#Exposure_meter_calibration

Yes, go

photographic triangle is a good name . but im sure many will criticise it just the same. as they criticise exposure triangle.

petapixel.com/2016/07/18/never-teach-exposure-triangle-beginners/

thats right i dont own an exposure meter i have better ones built in my cameras , btw i actually own my studio because i make money and dont waste time with useless work flows 😎 and if you take notice he is using the light meter for constant lighting not studio strobes but you knew that didnt you 🙄

No need to "take notice" it is obvious, even to me ...

... less obvious is what "my 7 studio lights" are ...

"keep it vague; avoid the plague" ... 😃

So, what then is the name? -
It's just an idle sound...

Tony, as you probably know, Light Value is calculated from the camera settings and is not a direct measurement of the scene luminance.

[deleted]