Prev: For Rich and his fans.
Next: Immigration: The REAL Story of the Immigrants Who Opened the Floodgates
From: RichA on 2 Feb 2010 23:17
Though it could still be used to sell cameras, rather than review
their quality.. The bright spot is their so-called absolute ratings.
Lets see how they work out.

http://blog.dpreview.com/editorial/2010/02/bouquets-and-brickbats-developing-a-new-rating-system.html
From: Paul Heslop on 3 Feb 2010 02:45
RichA wrote:
>
> Though it could still be used to sell cameras, rather than review
> their quality.. The bright spot is their so-called absolute ratings.
> Lets see how they work out.
>
oh let's not bother

--
Paul (we break easy)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
From: Neil Harrington on 3 Feb 2010 09:57

"RichA" <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7d19b63c-937d-4968-b48d-1f02ef180d6c(a)d27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> Though it could still be used to sell cameras, rather than review
> their quality.. The bright spot is their so-called absolute ratings.
> Lets see how they work out.
>
> http://blog.dpreview.com/editorial/2010/02/bouquets-and-brickbats-developing-a-new-rating-system.html

Interesting. Most of the sub-rating methods still appear subjective rather
than absolute, but I suppose there's no way really to avoid that. It does
show they're trying to improve, which is something.


From: Rich on 3 Feb 2010 21:33
On Feb 3, 9:57 am, "Neil Harrington" <ne...(a)home.com> wrote:
> "RichA" <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7d19b63c-937d-4968-b48d-1f02ef180d6c(a)d27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Though it could still be used to sell cameras, rather than review
> > their quality..  The bright spot is their so-called absolute ratings.
> > Lets see how they work out.
>
> >http://blog.dpreview.com/editorial/2010/02/bouquets-and-brickbats-dev...
>
> Interesting. Most of the sub-rating methods still appear subjective rather
> than absolute, but I suppose there's no way really to avoid that. It does
> show they're trying to improve, which is something.

There is actually nothing wrong with their tests that I can see,
(except their best case DR figures are worthless in real life) if
they'd limit it to that and avoid the explanations, they'd be better
off because it's there that the misdirection takes form. The language
they use has always been the problem. Anyone can look at images and
the noise, DR, etc., Graph the results, no problem. The salesmanship
used in the descriptions of what is visible is the problem.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: For Rich and his fans.
Next: Immigration: The REAL Story of the Immigrants Who Opened the Floodgates