• Members 3952 posts
    April 28, 2023, 10:09 a.m.

    Nope. Just challenging the authenticity and legitimacy of your images as I am entitled to do.

  • Members 3952 posts
    April 28, 2023, 10:12 a.m.

    That is another example of you not telling the truth and you wonder why I challenge your honesty and integrity 😂

    What I posted was not an accusation but a statement of fact.

    I said

    Are you saying it is difficult for everyone to fake and edit images to suit an agenda if someone wants to?

  • Members 2306 posts
    April 28, 2023, 10:22 a.m.

    what agenda ?

  • Members 3952 posts
    April 28, 2023, 10:23 a.m.

    Whatever the agenda was that they were pushing.

  • April 28, 2023, 10:52 a.m.

    Please can you stop this sniping at each other. It just pisses the rest of us off.

    Alan

  • Members 2306 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:01 a.m.

    pisses me off more, i post a simple image and expect questions and answers related to my image . not some primary school crap all the time. is it so god dam hard to have a sensible conversation on this site without all the garbage thrown in ?

  • Members 3952 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:13 a.m.

    If you don't like the authenticity and legitimacy of your images being rightfully questioned for the reasons Bob correctly mentioned earlier then post links to raw files in the first place and don't run away when asked to do so if you don't at first post links to them.

    You had the option to post raw files as well as those jpegs but you decided to withhold the raw files and post only jpegs with who knows what processing and editing applied to them.

    So it is totally reasonable for anyone to wonder what you might be hiding.

    You have only yourself and your past history to blame for people sniping at you.

  • Members 209 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:43 a.m.

    but your images are not that simple. The lightness difference is far smaller than you would expect with the ISO difference. So asking what processing was done is a fair question which could be answered by providing actual jpg's with complete exif

  • Members 976 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:48 a.m.

    That's the problem, you haven't. A screenshot isn't the images we need to see. Pushing JPEGs much?

  • Members 2306 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:51 a.m.

    can you not read ? iso 4000 raw processed no adjustments. iso 100 pushed to reach the same brightness as the iso 4000 image. the difference is in the shadows. WB is also off shooting underexposed.

  • Members 2306 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:53 a.m.

    dont you read my posts ? iso 4000 raw processed no adjustments. iso 100 pushed to reach the same brightness as the iso 4000 image. the difference is in the shadows. WB is also off shooting underexposed.

  • Members 976 posts
    April 28, 2023, 11:55 a.m.

    Post the raw files. Simple.

  • Members 2306 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:07 p.m.

    if you cant see the replicated results its not my problem. a6300 and a74

    test shot noise.jpg
    test shot 3.jpg
    test shot 2.jpg
    test 4.jpg

    test shot 2.jpg

    JPG, 1.3 MB, uploaded by DonaldB on April 28, 2023.

    test 4.jpg

    JPG, 2.2 MB, uploaded by DonaldB on April 28, 2023.

    test shot noise.jpg

    JPG, 1.6 MB, uploaded by DonaldB on April 28, 2023.

    test shot 3.jpg

    JPG, 1.8 MB, uploaded by DonaldB on April 28, 2023.

  • Members 209 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:18 p.m.

    That does not tell me much about what you actually did in processing. Which slider is “push”?

  • Members 976 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:25 p.m.
  • Members 976 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:27 p.m.

    It tells nothing at all as the raw files are not provided. IMHO best to ignore the screenshots.

  • Members 140 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:49 p.m.

    As my uncle “Don” said… “You know too much.”

  • Members 976 posts
    April 28, 2023, 12:53 p.m.

    I'll take “You know too much” over "You know too little, and most of it wrong" :)