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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Color Science
On Nov 8, 2018, nospam wrote
(in ) : In iganews.com, Savageduck wrote: I found it interesting. It's not actually about color but peoples perception of color and color preferences. It's more psychology than photography. There is quite a lot to be learned from it. there's nothing at all to be learned from it, especially since he has no understanding himself. the entire video could be summarized as different cameras when set to their default settings produce jpegs that look different. ...but, the result, regardless of the actual IQ/color fidelity of the various prints was an indication of individual manufacturer bias among those who responded to his test. It didn¹t actually matter which cameras were used, or even if different cameras were used. What mattered was that those polled believed that different cameras were used, and that they believed that the prints were the product of the cameras on the labeled prints. people believe all sorts of things. this is not news. However, it is interesting to see these beliefs, and biases highlighted. This was much the same as a blind wine tasting where due to mixed/changed labels, tasters are confused between a bottle of Trader Joe¹s *Two Buck Chuck* and a $50 bottle. one of the better ones was where red food coloring was added to white wine and fooled wine experts. Same type of test. it's also the same nonsense audiophiles spew, such as one speaker cable sounding better than another, something that is electrically impossible. people are very easily influenced. Yup! As Eric said, this actually had nothing to do with photography, or actual *color science*, but the particular brand biases/prejudices of the group of tested testers. So it had nothing to do with Northrup¹s photographic knowledge, lack thereof, or how much the Northrups might be shills for any particular brand. in other words, nothing useful. and he was shilling, just not for a particular product. at the end of the video, he hyped a link via his tracking service, the results of which he then markets to advertisers. he could have given the direct link, but then he would not get paid as much. Opinions, opinions, opinions. That said, it seems your computer clock has not made the adjustment back from daylight savings time. Note that your post is time stamped an hour before mine which you responded to. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Science Disproves Evolution | Paul Heslop | Digital Photography | 2 | January 28th 09 08:55 AM |
Science at it's best | otzi | In The Darkroom | 1 | July 12th 07 12:58 AM |
Science at it's best | otzi | In The Darkroom | 0 | July 12th 07 12:51 AM |
Science Diet vs Canidae | gaubster2 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | February 9th 05 03:58 PM |
Science Diet vs Felidae | gaubster2 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | February 9th 05 03:52 PM |