Dpreview REALLY scraping the barrel bottom now!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 8 Jul 2010 21:15 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 18:52:26 -0400, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"Outing Trolls is FUN!" <otif(a)trollouters.org> wrote in message >news:4q7a36lbls1hr4t8kt54d0iac9nnehb1t5(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 17:25:57 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> >>>In article <4c351a02$0$22128$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS >>><scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > the reason that raw is not in low end cameras is because the target >>>> > market doesn't care and the sensor isn't good enough for it to matter >>>> > that much. >>>> >>>> It's also because they don't want to be compelled to document it and >>>> then to field expensive support calls from the people trying to use it. >>> >>>that's basically the same thing. the target market isn't interested. >>>those who know about the benefits of raw won't be buying low end >>>cameras anyway. >> >> Benefits of RAW: >> >> 1. Trying to correct your under or over exposures manually and tediously >> because you or your camera failed to capture your image properly in the >> first place. >> >> 2. Trying to correct your white-balance manually and tediously because you >> or your camera failed to capture your image properly in the first place. >> >> Yup, that's about it! > > >Equally important, the adjustments are non-destructive. So is getting the image properly recorded in the very first place. Some of you DSLR-Trolls should learn how to do that sometime. You know, like REAL photographers do? It's part of what you were supposed to learn the very first week of owning any camera. Still not figured that part out yet, eh? (E.g.: Go ahead DaffyDuck, et.al. Show us another of your REALLY CRAPPY under/over-exposed, pukingly saturated, badly-white-balanced, and tilted shots!) Fuckingly useless trolls, one and all. Then they have the supreme gall to think they can hand out ANY advice about cameras and photography to anyone anywhere. What a laughingstock of utter fools.
From: TomTom on 8 Jul 2010 21:23 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:57:41 -0700, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:15:22 -0400, in ><4c365c4e$0$5507$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" ><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>news:k0ob36lt6l3kt36ukmsic705guh0shfdh0(a)4ax.com... > >>> The key is to learn how to use a given tool effectively. I personally >>> find less and less need for RAW output from my FZ28 as I get better and >>> better at using it. >>> >>> For example, when shooting sailboats (with large white sails), if I set >>> the metering mode properly and exposure bias of -1/3, I get consistent >>> good results right out of camera. >> >>Interesting. I have found underexposure by as much as -1.3 works. But I >>guess that may depend upon how much of your image is pure white and the >>metering system you choose for that shot. In snow I have used between -2 >>& -3. >>Obviously, you mileage varies. > >Sure. You want to minimize fooling of the exposure metering by the >white sails or snow, and compensate for whatever error is left, which >will be different in different cases. The most oft-used button on any camera today should be the EV-Compensation button, even more than the shutter button. If only some of these people would realize what it is for, exactly why it was put there, and then learn how to use it properly. I really like the CHDK implementation of this where it also real-time updates the EVF/LCD to reflect the change visually, instantly. (The same way as it works in one of my other superzoom cameras.) It's like having a miracle-of-modern-technology "darkroom" instantly developing your film before you even take the shot.
From: Bruce on 9 Jul 2010 05:12 On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:23:19 -0500, TomTom <ttom697921(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:57:41 -0700, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> >wrote: >>On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 19:15:22 -0400, in >><4c365c4e$0$5507$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com>, "Peter" >><peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>>news:k0ob36lt6l3kt36ukmsic705guh0shfdh0(a)4ax.com... >> >>>> The key is to learn how to use a given tool effectively. I personally >>>> find less and less need for RAW output from my FZ28 as I get better and >>>> better at using it. >>>> >>>> For example, when shooting sailboats (with large white sails), if I set >>>> the metering mode properly and exposure bias of -1/3, I get consistent >>>> good results right out of camera. >>> >>>Interesting. I have found underexposure by as much as -1.3 works. But I >>>guess that may depend upon how much of your image is pure white and the >>>metering system you choose for that shot. In snow I have used between -2 >>>& -3. >>>Obviously, you mileage varies. >> >>Sure. You want to minimize fooling of the exposure metering by the >>white sails or snow, and compensate for whatever error is left, which >>will be different in different cases. > >The most oft-used button on any camera today should be the EV-Compensation >button, even more than the shutter button. If only some of these people >would realize what it is for, exactly why it was put there, and then learn >how to use it properly. I really like the CHDK implementation of this where >it also real-time updates the EVF/LCD to reflect the change visually, >instantly. (The same way as it works in one of my other superzoom cameras.) >It's like having a miracle-of-modern-technology "darkroom" instantly >developing your film before you even take the shot. As so often happens, we see here a group of P&S users who don't know what RAW is for. Navas would gain a couple of stops in dynamic range by using RAW. That is absolutely invaluable when shooting subjects such as sailboats with large expanses of highlights (white sails). There are strong similarities with wedding photography. But instead of using RAW to extract that extra dynamic range, Navas is lazy. He shoots JPEGs and uses exposure compensation to avoid blowing out the highlights. In doing this, he loses dynamic range and shadow detail. It's just another example of Navas's dogged pursuit of mediocrity. No wonder he doesn't understand why some people aspire to far higher standards than he does.
From: John McWilliams on 9 Jul 2010 11:57 Bruce wrote: > On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:47:23 -0500, Outing Trolls is FUN! > Your ignorance is showing, yet again. > I've conceded that the pest is not so ignorant as angry and powerless. I do wish you and others who are intelligent and have knowledge would stop feeding him by *any* reply. [Replies by those who aren't useful can be easily filtered.] Please. -- lsmft
From: John Navas on 9 Jul 2010 12:38
On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 10:12:42 +0100, in <bhpd36dpfj01qdbhfbeuup91em9dsmhgf3(a)4ax.com>, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >As so often happens, we see here a group of P&S users who don't know >what RAW is for. > >Navas would gain a couple of stops in dynamic range by using RAW. That >is absolutely invaluable when shooting subjects such as sailboats with >large expanses of highlights (white sails). There are strong >similarities with wedding photography. > >But instead of using RAW to extract that extra dynamic range, Navas is >lazy. He shoots JPEGs and uses exposure compensation to avoid blowing >out the highlights. In doing this, he loses dynamic range and shadow >detail. > >It's just another example of Navas's dogged pursuit of mediocrity. No >wonder he doesn't understand why some people aspire to far higher >standards than he does. Nope. You must be very insecure and feel very threatened. -- John Old saying in litigation: When you have the facts on your side, pound on the facts. When the law is on your side, pound on the law. When neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound on the table (and your opponent). |