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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: put simply, the dynamic range in stops can't ever be more than the number of bits in the adc. Only if you code one stop per bit. There is no requirement that it be a simple linear scale. If you have (say) a dynamic range of 16 stops it is still possible to code it with 14 bits: i.e. 1.14 stops per bit. This can be variously ignored or tidied up by the raw decoder. that's true, except that sensors are linear devices and therefore that does not apply. Dynamic range is being compressed all along the way. A classic example is HDR. hdr is done with multiple exposures. So? so it doesn't count. you're so lost. With a wide range source it is compressed to enable it to be viewed on a scren or monitor. displays are non-linear. sensors are linear. With almost any source it is compressed when it is printed. printers are non-linear. sensors are linear. So? you're so lost. Why on earth should it not be compressed (a little or a lot) when it is encoded in a raw file? because sensors are linear devices. And linear devices can't be compressed? you're so lost. i explained this already. feel free to design a non-linear sensor. until that time, they remain linear. i've said this several times. why do you ignore it? Because it is not binding. math and physics are as binding as it gets. Only as binding as the axioms which lie behind them. And no axiom is binding. you're so lost. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:46:45 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: put simply, the dynamic range in stops can't ever be more than the number of bits in the adc. Only if you code one stop per bit. There is no requirement that it be a simple linear scale. If you have (say) a dynamic range of 16 stops it is still possible to code it with 14 bits: i.e. 1.14 stops per bit. This can be variously ignored or tidied up by the raw decoder. that's true, except that sensors are linear devices and therefore that does not apply. Dynamic range is being compressed all along the way. A classic example is HDR. hdr is done with multiple exposures. So? so it doesn't count. Of course it counts. When the subject is dynamic range compression you can't go around excluding the product of some techniques while excluding the product of others. The point is that any wide dynamic range has to be compressed if the full image is to be viewed by either screen or print. Otherwise you get burned out highs and plugged solid shadows. you're so lost. I'm not lost. I'm ahead of you. :-) With a wide range source it is compressed to enable it to be viewed on a scren or monitor. displays are non-linear. sensors are linear. With almost any source it is compressed when it is printed. printers are non-linear. sensors are linear. So? you're so lost. Please explain why. Why on earth should it not be compressed (a little or a lot) when it is encoded in a raw file? because sensors are linear devices. And linear devices can't be compressed? you're so lost. No. It's just that I am not stuck with one particular way of looking at things. i explained this already. feel free to design a non-linear sensor. until that time, they remain linear. i've said this several times. why do you ignore it? Because it is not binding. math and physics are as binding as it gets. Only as binding as the axioms which lie behind them. And no axiom is binding. you're so lost. And you are in a rut. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: put simply, the dynamic range in stops can't ever be more than the number of bits in the adc. Only if you code one stop per bit. There is no requirement that it be a simple linear scale. If you have (say) a dynamic range of 16 stops it is still possible to code it with 14 bits: i.e. 1.14 stops per bit. This can be variously ignored or tidied up by the raw decoder. that's true, except that sensors are linear devices and therefore that does not apply. Dynamic range is being compressed all along the way. A classic example is HDR. hdr is done with multiple exposures. So? so it doesn't count. Of course it counts. nope. it does not count. full stop. an adc can only encode *one* image from *one* sensor at a time. what you do with multiple images at a later time is *irrelevant*. When the subject is dynamic range compression you can't go around excluding the product of some techniques while excluding the product of others. The point is that any wide dynamic range has to be compressed if the full image is to be viewed by either screen or print. Otherwise you get burned out highs and plugged solid shadows. that's all wonderful, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with a sensor and an adc. you're so lost. I'm not lost. I'm ahead of you. :-) in an alternate universe, perhaps. here on earth, no. With a wide range source it is compressed to enable it to be viewed on a scren or monitor. displays are non-linear. sensors are linear. With almost any source it is compressed when it is printed. printers are non-linear. sensors are linear. So? you're so lost. Please explain why. i did explain why, multiple times. Why on earth should it not be compressed (a little or a lot) when it is encoded in a raw file? because sensors are linear devices. And linear devices can't be compressed? you're so lost. No. It's just that I am not stuck with one particular way of looking at things. looking at things the wrong way do not count. i explained this already. feel free to design a non-linear sensor. until that time, they remain linear. i've said this several times. why do you ignore it? Because it is not binding. math and physics are as binding as it gets. Only as binding as the axioms which lie behind them. And no axiom is binding. you're so lost. And you are in a rut. it ain't me who is in a rut. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Snit said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:12:06 -0700:
But you just lie and lie and lie. It is what you do. Here is another example, when you claimed that there was no way to record Wi-Fi signals in real time in iOS, and when you insisted there was nothing one can do with iOS that cannot be done on Android: https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo Where is your video? I keep asking and you keep running. And you always will. Face it -- you were busted lying. Someone explain why these iOS apologists incessantly and continually troll wholly fabricated *imaginary iOS functionality*. Anyone with a working brain immediately noticed that the iOS apologists Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, and others, didn't know the difference between a speedtest (Mbps) and a signal strength measurement (decibels). And yet, the iOS apologists, desperate to show iOS functionality (anything), resorted to a complete and utter fabrication, which only worked on the clueless iOS gullibles. I only speak fact. This is Android: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg This is iOS: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg -- *It's a fact Apple iOS devices can't graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time* https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Snit said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 08:36:22 -0700:
This is a claim you made but never supported -- in fact your own links refuted this claim But you lie a lot. https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo Where is your video? I keep asking and you keep running. And you always will. Face it -- you were busted lying. Why do iOS apologists incessantly claim *imaginary* iOS functionality? Does anyone else find it odd that the iOS apologists lie and then accuse everyone else of lying when it comes to their claims of iOS functionality? Snit brazenly *fabricated* completely *imaginary* iOS functionality in that video he incessantly trolls on a half dozen newsgroups in about two-score posts. https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo Anyone with a working brain *immediately* saw what the Y axis indicated. Android: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg iOS: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg My videos of *actual Android functionality*: WiFi Analyzer: http://www.filedropper.com/wifianalyzersignalstrength Fritz: https://www.sendspace.com/file/gvckbe Snit's brazen fabrication of *imaginary iOS functionality*: Sweetspot: http://www.filedropper.com/iosshowingwi-fiovertime-7qaaba6dfio The question is *why* do the iOS apologists not only brazenly lie, but openly doublespeak that obvious, open, and proven, facts are a lie? Why do such iOS apologists incessantly claim *imaginary* iOS functionality? -- *It's a fact Apple iOS devices can't graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time* https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Davoud said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:27:17 -0400:
The troll has a serious case of Apple envy. Hi Davoud, You claim that I "troll" and yet, you state that someone with facts has "Apple envy". I don't claim that you are an iOS apologist, but your statement calling anyone with actual facts a "troll" must be pointed out as a serious case of "fact envy". I *always* speak facts. You consider facts "trolls". Are you simply yet another of the iOS gullibles? |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Snit said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:30:05 -0700:
Well, recently the "substance" I have been offering is just to show Harry to be lying... and it is fun for me. https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo And his own link, STILL showing 5 of the 10 top cameras are on iPhones: https://www.dxomark.com/category/mobile-reviews But, sure, the point that all he can do is run has been proved a dozen+ times over. It's interesting to note that you say it's "fun" for you to show people armed with facts to be "lying" ... Android: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg iOS: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/...sweetspots.jpg When the facts prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you *fabricated* that iOS *imaginary* functionality, which anyone with a working brain noticed the very first few seconds of watching your ridiculous video. https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo Of course, the iOS apologists, Jolly Roger, Savageduck, nospam, Lewis, etc., never noticed as facts are anathema to iOS apologists. Still, it's odd that even the iOS gullibles such as Davoud, didn't engage their own brains when they deprecated facts preferring to believe in your fantasies of wholly imaginary iOS functionality. WiFi Analyzer: http://www.filedropper.com/wifianalyzersignalstrength Fritz: https://www.sendspace.com/file/gvckbe -- *It's a fact Apple iOS devices can't graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time* https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp...Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Davoud said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 18:25:56 -0400:
So how many times do you have to snap at his troll bait before you give it up? You're obsessed, drawn like a moth to a flame, and whether you know it or not you get burned every time. The burn comes when he privately laughs at you Hi Davoud, First off, you're dead wrong (as always) since you'll notice that Snit trolled that fabricated video of imaginary iOS functionality about 40 or 50 times in numerous threads, where I only once responded to him telling him it was a fabrication - but - since he's an iOS apologist - he didn't get the obvious hint. You seem to be not an iOS apologist, but, just an iOS gullible, where you and the likes of Savageduck merely show an inability to *comprehend* facts, and not so much the propensity to *fabricate* wholly *imaginary* iOS functionality as Jolly Roger, nospam, Lewis, JamieJK, and others do. Please bear in mind that I only speak facts. You call any fact you don't like, a troll. That makes *you* the troll, as you are well aware. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Davoud said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 20:04:31 -0400:
You're delusional. You don't "have" him doing anything; he has you. The sorry fact is that these iOS apologigs (e.g., Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, etc.) are so utterly wrong that it's child's play to prove that everything they say is a complete fabrication of imaginary iOS functionality. The adult question is *why* the iOS apologists incessantly fabricate imaginary iOS functionality and why you iOS gullibles actually believe it. The fact is that not one iOS gullible even *comprehended* what Snit's video actually showed. Whereas anyone with a working brain *immediately* knew, on sight! Android: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg iOS: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/...sweetspots.jpg |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Pixel 2 dethrones iPhone 8 Plus and Galaxy Note 8 in camera rankings
He who is Snit said on Thu, 05 Oct 2017 09:40:12 -0700:
See how you lash out now that I have proved you wrong: https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo It is not like it is hard. Notice how the iOS apologists cater to the brainless iOS gullibles when they incessantly state "it's not like it's hard" to show iOS is functional. The fact is Snit *fabricated* completely *imaginary* iOS functionality in that video he incessantly trolls on a half dozen newsgroups in about 30-odd posts. https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo Anyone with a working brain *immediately* saw what the Y axis indicated. Android: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/2wifianalyzer.jpg iOS: http://wetakepic.com/images/2017/10/11/wifi_sweetspots.jpg And yet, the iOS apologists proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they *fabricate* iOS functionality in a desperate bid to show that iOS devices have some functionality (anything!) that isn't already on Android. Of course it's "easy" for them, just as it is for Apple Marketing, to convince iOS gullibles, since Snit's video is a complete fabrication of imaginary iOS functionality. My videos of *actual Android functionality*: WiFi Analyzer: http://www.filedropper.com/wifianalyzersignalstrength Fritz: https://www.sendspace.com/file/gvckbe Snit's brazen fabrication of *imaginary iOS functionality*: Sweetspot: http://www.filedropper.com/iosshowingwi-fiovertime-7qaaba6dfio -- *It's a fact Apple iOS devices can't graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time* https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.ipad/-T7FEXIdU9Q/Dhy-LFH3AwAJ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Samsung selling refurb Galaxy Note 7's | Bill W | Digital Photography | 11 | April 1st 17 11:49 PM |
You can still buy ticking time-bomb Samsung Galaxy Note 7 on Ebay | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 6 | October 16th 16 08:50 AM |
You can still buy ticking time-bomb Samsung Galaxy Note 7 on Ebay | Savageduck[_3_] | Digital Photography | 2 | October 12th 16 05:14 PM |
Samsung recalling over 1 MILLION Galaxy Note 7 $900 phones over battery instability | nospam | Digital Photography | 4 | September 9th 16 11:54 PM |
Samsung recalling over 1 MILLION Galaxy Note 7 $900 phones over battery instability | Eric Stevens | Digital Photography | 3 | September 5th 16 06:10 PM |