I didn't demonstrate that. You shouldn't accuse people of cheating based on nothing.
I didn't demonstrate that. You shouldn't accuse people of cheating based on nothing.
That is your opinion as is your right to have.
What I wrote conveyed the meaning and context correctly.
In any case you are continuing to prove my point that you are the type of person who does not practise what they preach, so I don't take you seriously.
You suggest to people to not reply to my posts and then you make a fool of yourself by continuing to do so. How dumb is that? lol :-D
@xpatUSA has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @xpatUSA has written:[practiced] what you preach.....
Perhaps you are not aware but the world for me does not revolve around American spelling :-D
Where I live when used as a noun it is "practice" and when used as a verb, as it was in my sentence, it is "practise" :-)
Then, as a writer of real English, it would have been better to write "if you were to practise", assuming that your schooling included English grammar.
That is your opinion as is your right to have.
What I wrote conveyed the meaning and context correctly.
In any case you are continuing to prove my point that you are the type of person who does not practise what they preach, so I don't take you seriously.
You suggest to people to not reply to my posts and then you make a fool of yourself by continuing to do so. How dumb is that? lol :-D
And here you are yet again with your inimitably rude and confrontational style!
At one time in the era of the Exposure Triangle diatribe I was 100% on your side vs. the others - but expect no more support from me, now that you have made it very personal with that last sentence.
I await your next pathetic attempt at the coveted thread-winning Last Word.
1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
@DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
I told him so, he prefers to ignore it. Maybe he was tricked by zebras or histogram. Anyway, he dialed -0.3 EV EC.
Also, this isn't raw, this is lossy:
f/4 wouldn't be my choice either.
@DannoLeftForums has written: @xpatUSA has written: @DannoLeftForums has written: @xpatUSA has written:[practiced] what you preach.....
Perhaps you are not aware but the world for me does not revolve around American spelling :-D
Where I live when used as a noun it is "practice" and when used as a verb, as it was in my sentence, it is "practise" :-)
Then, as a writer of real English, it would have been better to write "if you were to practise", assuming that your schooling included English grammar.
That is your opinion as is your right to have.
What I wrote conveyed the meaning and context correctly.
In any case you are continuing to prove my point that you are the type of person who does not practise what they preach, so I don't take you seriously.
You suggest to people to not reply to my posts and then you make a fool of yourself by continuing to do so. How dumb is that? lol :-D
And here you are yet again with your inimitably rude and confrontational style!
At one time in the era of the Exposure Triangle diatribe I was 100% on your side vs. the others - but expect no more support from me, now that you have made it very personal with that last sentence.
I await your next pathetic attempt at the coveted thread-winning Last Word.
Yep, you are continuing to prove my point :-D
@DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
no its not its perfectly exposed.
@DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
its perfectly exposed as i seen it. pushing the histogram to the right is not exposure accuracy.
@JimKasson has written: @DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
no its not its perfectly exposed.
Your definition of exposure is different to Jim's.
Your definition of exposure is how dark or light a photo looks on the medium it is being viewed on. That is actually image lightness not exposure.
Exposure is the amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
A lot more light could have been put onto the sensor without clipping the raw data.
its perfectly exposed
Oh boy. Pigeons and chess.
@DonaldB has written: @JimKasson has written: @DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
no its not its perfectly exposed.
Your definition of exposure is different to Jim's.
Your definition of exposure is how dark or light a photo looks on the medium it is being viewed on. That is actually image lightness not exposure.
Exposure is the amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
I took the image and its how i wanted to expose the image. so its perfect. Jim has yet to enter the comparrision and post a converted raw thats better than the jpeg. and Btw you havnt either. 😉
pushing the histogram to the right is not exposure accuracy
According to Sony's own raw converter you clipped the shadows.
converted raw
You didn't shoot it in raw :) Your arw is lossy compressed.
@DonaldB has written:converted raw
You didn't shoot it in raw :) Your arw is lossy compressed.
its still 14 bit
@IliahBorg has written: @DonaldB has written:converted raw
You didn't shoot it in raw :) Your arw is lossy compressed.
its still 14 bit
and its shot in apsc mode. so everyone wouldnt complain about the file size.
@DonaldB has written:pushing the histogram to the right is not exposure accuracy
According to Sony's own raw converter you clipped the shadows.
the camera says i didnt.
I took the image and its how i wanted to expose the image. so its perfect.
Nope, you got the image lightness you wanted.
A lot more light could have been put on the sensor without clipping the raw data.
Exposure is the amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
@DannoLeftForums has written: @DonaldB has written: @JimKasson has written: @DonaldB has written:1drv.ms/i/s!ArStsPjQ301PmU9skeBNZNafiIP4?e=dRAQER
post your best conversion Danno, lets see how good you are and im putting up the jpeg😁
This is comprehensively underexposed:
no its not its perfectly exposed.
Your definition of exposure is different to Jim's.
Your definition of exposure is how dark or light a photo looks on the medium it is being viewed on. That is actually image lightness not exposure.
Exposure is the amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open.
I took the image and its how i wanted to expose the image. so its perfect. Jim has yet to enter the comparrision and post a converted raw thats better than the jpeg. and Btw you havnt either. 😉
I did. You ignored it.