If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message ... You've got the same name as our commie representative to Congress in this area. They're not cutting in the Olympic National Park. Now you at least clarified National Parks. There is lumbering on National Lands, not all US National Land is designated Parks. |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
wrote:
In message , Rob Davison wrote: If I understand the 'sunny 16' rule right then my 10D seems to be spot on. Test shot (manual mode, ISO 100 @ F16 1/100th): http://www.pbase.com/image/32057597 The histogram for this image has data right the way across. This image does not exist, according to pbase, at the time of this post. My apologies. It is back up there now along with several slightly more interesting photographs taken with the same settings (as sunny16a-d) on this page: http://www.pbase.com/mapleglen/recent&page=3 The snowdrops are perhaps slightly underexposed but by nowhere near as much as the car in your example photo. Maybe your 10D is unwell? There is nothing wrong with the camera, relatively speaking. Exposure is generally fine, using the internal metering. The camera's exposure system is clearly calibrated to the sensitivity of the sensor and the gain amplifier. BUT, I have noticed in the past that my images tend to have less noise than most other 10Ds at the same ISO. Mine shows a number of very noticeable 'hot pixels' in two minute night exposures and a poster in another recent thread apparently has virtually none in an eleven minute exposure so you might be right. Hard to believe that Canons QC (or the components being used if you don't look at it as a 'problem') can vary so much all the same. Interesting thread. Thanks for starting it. Rob. -- |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
In article , Brian C.
Baird wrote: Replanting doesn't do much. It's in the best interests of the timber companies to clear cut every damn tree within sight. Point being? There are better ways to harvest timber. There's nothing wrong with clearcutting as long as it's done properly. It just ain't pretty. this area. They're not cutting in the Olympic National Park. Maybe because it's a... NATIONAL PARK? You said they were cutting in national parks. They're not. |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
In article , Brian C.
Baird wrote: Replanting doesn't do much. It's in the best interests of the timber companies to clear cut every damn tree within sight. Point being? There are better ways to harvest timber. There's nothing wrong with clearcutting as long as it's done properly. It just ain't pretty. this area. They're not cutting in the Olympic National Park. Maybe because it's a... NATIONAL PARK? You said they were cutting in national parks. They're not. |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article , Apteryx wrote: I see that I misrembered a couple of key points (or else remembered things said by posters and forgot the article). The reduction is claimed to be only 10% rather than 50% (although it is said to be as high as 37% in Hong Kong) and the cause is pollution rather than the sun's output. Sounds like more bull**** from the greeners. So there is no air pollution? -- Destroy your safe and happy lives Before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock'n'roll |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article , Apteryx wrote: I see that I misrembered a couple of key points (or else remembered things said by posters and forgot the article). The reduction is claimed to be only 10% rather than 50% (although it is said to be as high as 37% in Hong Kong) and the cause is pollution rather than the sun's output. Sounds like more bull**** from the greeners. So there is no air pollution? -- Destroy your safe and happy lives Before it is too late The battles we fought were long and hard Just not to be consumed by rock'n'roll |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
10D ISO ratings a lie?
I second that! This image definitely does not qualify for the 'sunny 16'
rule. Try taking an image without shadows on a cloudless day during maximum sunlight. As was stated earlier, this setting is only the 'starting point' for a bracket. Keep in mind that light intensity is dynamic - it is constantly changing. "Darrell Larose" wrote in message ers.com... wrote in message ... In message , Brian C. Baird wrote: Sunny f16 photo from 10D: http://www.pbase.com/image/32053524 The white border is so that you don't adapt to the dark image and perceive the highlights as brighter than they are. The image is converted in ACR with default parameters; no levels adjustments whatsoever. No processing in PS other than bicubic resize to 600*400 and border added. -- That IS NOT a sunny f:16 image. What did you meter in that image? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|