Scene luminance has nothing to do with exposure.

yes the irony and yet still know one can disprove my findings .

No, not true at all because your findings were shown on multiple occasions by multiple people to be not true and how/why.

You not accepting the flaws in your findings does not make your findings true 😃

Better to say, "No one can convince me I'm wrong." That's more and more the norm nowadays, and examples far more destructive than raw histograms abound. Honestly, Don, you take some really outstanding photos. Why argue against facts? It's like a talented surfer arguing that the Moon doesn't cause tides. Either make an effort to understand the facts (and, by all means, press people to explain them to you until you do understand -- so long as it's an honest attempt to understand), or just say you don't care about the facts.

Here, I'll give an example from my own experience. There was a time that I thought exposure and total light were the same thing. I argued with this person about it, and, quite honestly, I was more than a little arrogant and got pretty snippy with him. I honestly thought they were the same thing, and presented sources that supported my case, not the least of which was Wikipedia, which, at the time, defined [photographic] exposure as "the amount of light projected on the medium" (it's since been corrected).

Anyway, after a long exchange, he was able to convince me I was wrong, he was right, and I learned something really important. However, this happy result happened for two reasons: I had honest intent and he was patient with me because he realized I had honest intent.

Just a suggestion, mind you. After all, I'm quite the fan of "entertainment", too. 😉

No Im right.

with a RGB value of 252 on the brightest white Im always right. what do you think your camera histogram reads for white RGB value 220 😜
and btw my zebras were not blinking , and lets face it the camera can only adjust exposure 1/3 increments

That is just your opinion.

The flaws in your findings and logic have been explained numerous times.

Given you have a proven history of telling lies and falsifying images to suit the agenda you are pushing at the time you can claim you are right as much as you like.

But without also providing verifiable proof to support your findings it is totally reasonable for me and others if they so choose to not believe anything you post.

No they havent . try again. post your camera histogram clipping with a bright value of RGB 220 😁

That is your opinion and that is fine but you seem to be struggling to cope with people who do not believe you for the reasons I posted earlier 🙂

answer me this , under clip a highlite using your incamea histogram, then take the image into ACR convert to 16bit file and in PS take a colour reading
of the brightest part of the image and tell me what the RGB value is. my guess is 220 . and while your at it post the camera histogram as well as a raw histogram and the image just for reference. lets see you prove me wrong 😜

DannoTheChihuahua can't do that because he rarely takes photos. He just likes to bark about exposure in camera forums.

I have posted numerous images here on dprevived and on dpreview.

Feel free to post any comments or feedback on any of them 😃

I don't need to because as I mentioned earlier your findings have already been proven wrong multiple times by multiple people.

Obviously you are under no obligation to accept the proven flaws in your findings just like anyone else can choose to accept them 🙂

Right here proves only one point in Johns post if the rgb value of 252 on your whites scene reads as 252 in rgb then why is the red underexposed by over 2 stops when looking at the raw data?

In what color space?
Here is the same patches from a grey scale chart and see how different the histogram is when 2 different color spaces are used

again here

red is pushed to the far right while the other histogram shows that red is not even close to the right

Now think about this what if you use a color space that is larger than the color space your camera can proved?
If the color space of your camera shows clipping what do you think will happen if you say process that raw file in a larger color space?

theres no red in my image

Not my work flow , if it aint broke dont fix it. what does your camera histogram measure ?

How do you make white without any data from the red channel'
Stop and really think about it for a second

why dont you look at the raw histogram closer