.Im purely defending my integrity that others seem to doubt. The posted images display different noise patterns and colours of 2 equally exposed images at iso 100 and iso 4000. and begs the discussion that iso has an effect on a raw image file.
.Im purely defending my integrity that others seem to doubt. The posted images display different noise patterns and colours of 2 equally exposed images at iso 100 and iso 4000. and begs the discussion that iso has an effect on a raw image file.
.Im purely defending my integrity that others seem to doubt. The posted images display different noise patterns and colours of 2 equally exposed images at iso 100 and iso 4000. and begs the discussion that iso has an effect on a raw image file.
Again, post the raw files.
@Robert1955 has written: @DonaldB has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @SrMi has written:Who cares? It is all ancient history. Let's see if we can get back to the discussion. I know the answer is 101010 but what was your question again?
.Im purely defending my integrity that others seem to doubt. The posted images display different noise patterns and colours of 2 equally exposed images at iso 100 and iso 4000. and begs the discussion that iso has an effect on a raw image file.
Then you should have no problem publicly sharing the raw's these screenshots are based on
@DannoLeftForums has written: @DonaldB has written:its a good demonstration that shooting at iso 100 and raising the brightness in post displays more noise than shooting a iso 4000, also demonstrates that iso has an effect on the exposed raw image.
You haven't posted any verifiable evidence that proves your claim to be correct, especially in all cases.
See? I have no idea what is going on here really. But that claim is true. DPR and other pages are full of these DR, exposure latitude, brightening and pushing tests. Also basic measurements tell you that if you can read the full meaning of these.
Pushing low ISO image up to the brightness of the same exposure higher ISO image gets you more noise in the output image.
Hooooooooooraaaaaaay 🍻🍻🍻🍻👍 Thats all my images were posted for. and no one else could even give me an answer , this is the right place for beginners thats for sure.
@DonaldB has written: @Robert1955 has written: @DonaldB has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @SrMi has written:Who cares? It is all ancient history. Let's see if we can get back to the discussion. I know the answer is 101010 but what was your question again?
.Im purely defending my integrity that others seem to doubt. The posted images display different noise patterns and colours of 2 equally exposed images at iso 100 and iso 4000. and begs the discussion that iso has an effect on a raw image file.
Then you should have no problem publicly sharing the raw's these screenshots are based on
I had no problem in sharing them till certain members got up my nose and declared war.
Hooooooooooraaaaaaay 🍻🍻🍻🍻👍 Thats all my images were posted for. and no one else could even give me an answer , this is the right place for beginners thats for sure.
It's not that I proved it yet, and it is not hooooray if it takes you and other users to even begin to discuss a thing in +-400 posts. That is very low point.
@CrashpcCZ has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @DonaldB has written:its a good demonstration that shooting at iso 100 and raising the brightness in post displays more noise than shooting a iso 4000, also demonstrates that iso has an effect on the exposed raw image.
Unfortunately, you have proven neither claim as you don't show verifiable evidence.
You haven't posted any verifiable evidence that proves your claim to be correct, especially in all cases.See? I have no idea what is going on here really. But that claim is true. DPR and other pages are full of these DR, exposure latitude, brightening and pushing tests. Also basic measurements tell you that if you can read the full meaning of these.
Pushing low ISO image up to the brightness of the same exposure higher ISO image gets you more noise in the output image.Hooooooooooraaaaaaay 🍻🍻🍻🍻👍 Thats all my images were posted for. and no one else could even give me an answer , this is the right place for beginners thats for sure.
Unfortunately [for you], you have proven neither claim as you can or will not show evidence
@DonaldB has written: @CrashpcCZ has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @DonaldB has written:its a good demonstration that shooting at iso 100 and raising the brightness in post displays more noise than shooting a iso 4000, also demonstrates that iso has an effect on the exposed raw image.
Unfortunately, you have proven neither claim as you don't show verifiable evidence.
You haven't posted any verifiable evidence that proves your claim to be correct, especially in all cases.See? I have no idea what is going on here really. But that claim is true. DPR and other pages are full of these DR, exposure latitude, brightening and pushing tests. Also basic measurements tell you that if you can read the full meaning of these.
Pushing low ISO image up to the brightness of the same exposure higher ISO image gets you more noise in the output image.Hooooooooooraaaaaaay 🍻🍻🍻🍻👍 Thats all my images were posted for. and no one else could even give me an answer , this is the right place for beginners thats for sure.
Unfortunately [for you], you have proven neither claim as you can or will not show evidence
200 posts ago
a6300 and a74
Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Thats Danno brainwashing members and hes very good at it. well he thinks he is 😁its how he gets his adrenalin fix.
If we had a members gallery that would sort the men from the boys and who was talking s....t
Do we need a 'former nicks' commission to sort out once and for all who was ever who on DPReview. I have a friend who could trawl the databases for the answers.
I know exactly who DannoLeftForums and David1961 are Bob ;-)
@CrashpcCZ has written:Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Thats Danno brainwashing members and hes very good at it. well he thinks he is 😁its how he gets his adrenalin fix.
If we had a members gallery that would sort the men from the boys and who was talking s....t
a) No, it´s not what happens. He is stubborn, he dismisses some materials that might be taken as an evidence, but as far as I understand, he is here for himself, not asking anyone to work the same way he does.
b) Another personal attack
c) Another offtopic.
d) Another posting from the Authority, not the fact.
e) I have my own reservations and disagreements with Danno, about Danno, about his responses. There is no brainwashing going on.
I am discussing the input here you provided here. Nothing else.
You sent me a private message, I wrote not long time ago that I will not accept this way of working on this topic. Yet you are trying to affect me in privacy.
That to me looks somewhat shady, and it supports my opinion on your posted images. These might not be fake, but you are not acting in a way to trust you either.
And as I mentioned before, I don´t even want to discuss this topic with you anymore. I was helping Danno to solve his stuff, so maybe the thread could end for him sooner. Although I doubt that, with all that gasslighting, ot and arguing about nonsense.
@DonaldB has written: @CrashpcCZ has written:Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Thats Danno brainwashing members and hes very good at it. well he thinks he is 😁its how he gets his adrenalin fix.
If we had a members gallery that would sort the men from the boys and who was talking s....ta) No, it´s not what happens. He is stubborn, he dismisses some materials that might be taken as an evidence, but as far as I understand, he is here for himself, not asking anyone to work the same way he does.
b) Another personal attack
c) Another offtopic.
d) Another posting from the Authority, not the fact.
e) I have my own reservations and disagreements with Danno, about Danno, about his responses. There is no brainwashing going on.I am discussing the input here you provided here. Nothing else.
You sent me a private message, I wrote not long time ago that I will not accept this way of working on this topic. Yet you are trying to affect me in privacy.
That to me looks somewhat shady, and it supports my opinion on your posted images. These might not be fake, but you are not acting in a way to trust you either.And as I mentioned before, I don´t even want to discuss this topic with you anymore. I was helping Danno to solve his stuff, so maybe the thread could end for him sooner. Although I doubt that, with all that gasslighting, ot and arguing about nonsense.
Your thinking is defiantly different than mine, Different country different ideas ,i can understand that, it is what it is.
@CrashpcCZ has written:Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Thats Danno brainwashing members and hes very good at it. well he thinks he is 😁its how he gets his adrenalin fix.
If we had a members gallery that would sort the men from the boys and who was talking s....t
Bobn2 also posted he doesn’t trust your posted images to be genuine unless you post proof they are. He has his reasons.
You have not told the truth on too many occasions so you have only yourself to blame when I and other people question your honesty and integrity.
You repeatedly run away when asked to post proof to support your false claims against other members, even in this thread.
@DonaldB has written: @CrashpcCZ has written:Given the track records, people have reason to not trust you with the provided material. It is their right.
Thats Danno brainwashing members and hes very good at it. well he thinks he is 😁its how he gets his adrenalin fix.
If we had a members gallery that would sort the men from the boys and who was talking s....tBobn2 also posted he doesn’t trust your posted images to be genuine unless you post proof they are. He has his reasons.
You have not told the truth on too many occasions so you have only yourself to blame when I and other people question your honesty and integrity.
Like this thread 😂
I agree - and have already had discussions with Bob about this. Changes are afoot.
Alan
This was post 3 of this thread, answering to
Gentlemen, we are perhaps so far removed from the understanding of Beginning Photographers that we have lost touch with their thought process. I would LOVE to see DPRevived become the leading photography site on the Internet and I would LOVE to contribute to make that happen… but folks, we need to stop answering Beginner Questions with PhD dissertations.
and
Totally agree with you! 👍🏻
Or why make it simple when you can make it complicated 😎
I must have missed the changes AlanSh promied.
A new arrival, going to "News amd Discussions" and selecting this thread, entitled "The Beginners Question Area", if not daunted ba the 500+ replies dominated by very few members, would learn very little other than that these members are consistently rude and aggressive towards each other. If I were that new arrival, I would look elsewhere for entertainment and instruction.
Unlike the old DPR, I find it very difficult to find interesting threads here. Certainly they are not those that have 500+ postings, and many of the titles given to the threads are not very enticing or informative. But I can live with that. I would, however, prefer not to have to be continually reminded of counter-productive threads like this one and those few members that make it so long.
David
@Robert1955 has written:Sorry but I disagree both with needing books or using simplified but fundamentally flawed concepts. The books are frankly boring and old skool, the concepts will mislead you and are hard to unlearn.
What is needed is an approach that makes use of some of the strengths of digital photography: feedback is immediate, experimentation is free.
IMO that means that at the start a beginner needs to learn only that light comes in and gets recorded and an image comes out and that she/he can influence both sides.Now most people are inclined to start without reading more than a quick start and start trying. Where we can help them is by giving them some structure in how to do their experimentation.
For instance: pick a scene around the house. Photograph it (1) at full auto and with (2) a couple of shutter Time values (3) ditto Aperture values. Repeat this after each meal.
Then look at the photo's: which worked, which failed.As you see I don't offer explanation at this point. And ISO stays on auto as it should for beginners
I cannot believe I am reading this. You can never hope to educate yourself about anything, without a good textbook, with the emphasis on good.
A beginner will learn faster without frustration if he/she has read about some basic technical/artistic concepts first. A book written by a reliable author is the best place to start. Not the contradictory word of internet.
A beginner need to know about the pictorial effects of aperture and shutter speed. Noise tends to increase with increasing ISO. I guess the beginner needs to know what happens when you move the ISO dial.
So what book do you recommend as a "good textbook" for use with current equipment ?
Don Cox
Your thinking is defiantly different than mine, Different country different ideas ,i can understand that, it is what it is.
That´s fine. Yet for functioning gathering or society, it is most important to acknowledge that such gathering is on "international grounds", on grounds of truth and facts and topic. If you cannot align with that one bit, than maybe it is your own issue. There are instances and groups in which you might have no power. It might be unfortunate, unfair, it might not work for you, it might be a loss, but blaming others will not help one bit.
I do not think you like the thread. Not sure if it is your country ideas to commit personal attacks and diminish others opinions. That´s not what people that like the thing do. I call it out as a false statement, and wonder about its intentions. Like, trolling.