selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

That’s the whole point. The conventional values are not the actual precise values that are used.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Sure. But why do people get upset and make personal attacks? The OP is full of interesting information, presented well. If it is not of interest to people they can just ignore it.

Someone mentioned that Paul McCartney doesn't read music, and that reminded me that there tend to be ear players and readers, and very few are good at both. But there are good musicians from each camp. There is certainly never any cause for the two camps to be at war, as is so often the case here.

I blame sales and marketing programs for this. People are sold automatic this or that - "you don't need to know all of that complicated technical stuff to take good photographs" and "unleash your true creative self" - and people then image creativity to be some ethereal thing that is disconnected from the real world, and is somehow an expression of their true inner self. Any challenge to their choice of equipment then becomes a challenge to something that is critical to their personal identity.

In any case, if people would actually read the OP they would discover that it is a call for simplification of the technical aspects of photographically, for demystification, it is not a call for further complication.

Mike

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

If you use the calculator you can see how the half or third stop increments work with logarithms and APEX values.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

EXACTLY!

R.G. Loc: Scotland

So the camera lets me think I'm inputting a value of 1/50 when in reality it's going to use a value of 1/64?

On second thoughts, I think I can live with that .

I can think of times when you might want your shutter speed to coincide exactly with the frequency of the mains supply or the frequency of TV or video frame rate, but apart from that, methinks t'is not of any great import.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

You’ve gotta be kidding me. If Bipod wanted to change standards, would he come on a photography forum that is full of old man, who have ZERO influence? He is a troll. And he is also paranoid. Have you seen how many members he has accused of being employees of camera makers? Just because these members don’t dislike digital photography? Seriously, you can’t be this naive.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Actually the OP is talking about a lot of stuff that has been around and is old alternative systems. Also ASA (US) and DIN (German) standards were different. The Shutter Speeds on various shutters varied through the years and from nation to nation, brand to brand. I hope everyone realizes that the common f-stop numbers are just multiples of The Square Root of Two: approximately 1.4. And yes, do to it being approximate the sequence does go astray.

I don't find exposure confusing. I learned it ages ago using a handheld exposure meter. As for simplification, with automation as it is today there does seem to be no need to actually know about exposure to take ma photo. The camera does most of it for most people (not all of us though). Therefor based on the OP argument what is the point of labeling any values, arbitrary or linear. Now, personally I want to know what is going on and have and be able to use the real values of exposure as we know it. Again, I hope everyone realizes why we use f-stops and not the actual area of the iris pupal.

Part of the issue is do to people coming to photography with such different backgrounds. Having different knowledge bases and skills: mechanical, mathematical, logical, scientific, and artistic.

rond-photography Loc: Connecticut

Oops! Yes. Thanks for catching that!

newvy

You just made my headache worse for reading that. If exposure is simple...WTF. Hi Bob I liked your word can I use that? “ Obfuc...”

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I welcome his unique point of view. Those who do not are free to ignore the posts that do not interest them.

I don't think it is paranoia to suspect that most online discussions are infiltrated by people with hidden agendas. I have been approached with job offers to work as a troll in the field of food and agriculture, since I am knowledgeable on the subject, have good language skills, and there are commercial interests in the food industry who wish to infiltrate and surreptitiously influence the online discussions about food and farming issues. It is lucrative work, but I didn't go to work in agriculture for the money, and I passed on the offers. It is very rare now to see any online discussion about food and farming issues that is not dominated by what are most certainly paid operatives working undercover for various corporations and lobbying outfits.

Bipod's views on the camera industry are well thought out and well presented. You disagree. So be it. That does not make the other person a "troll" and it is not cause for personal attacks and insinuations. If you do not like these threads, why not stay off of them instead of disrupting them?

Now, I disagree with you om a couple of issues apparently. I thin k I have disagreed with you calmly and respectful. Is that OK with you, or in your view is that proper cause for you to once again make personal attacks against me?

Mike

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks, Mike. Good post. No, I don't find exposure confusing either, nor do I think Bipod does. But a lot of people do. We see it here everyday.

Yes, the camera does the thinking for people now. However, recently I had to scan a few hundred old photo prints, all by amateurs, all with pretty simple manual cameras from 50, 60 years ago, and there were at least as high a percentage that were at least adequately exposed as we see posted right here. Of course, those people may have thrown away poorly exposed prints. But still, we did pretty well back in the day with the "sunny 16" rule from those little charts enclosed with the rolls of film. We certainly knew as kids when we were first starting out how to focus on and expose for a photo of the moon, and how to freeze the motion of the moon (and we knew that the moon does move and that the earth does spin). I recently saw long threads about that subject that were just packed with confusion and misleading information.

I agree with you about people coming to photography with different backgrounds and different knowledge bases and skills. I think that all of that is interesting and valuable.

Mike

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Photography combines many fields, of arts and sciences. Different fields have had their own histories and terminologies and standards.

The unit of (heat) Energy for Biology, Chemistry, and Medical Sciences is the Calorie (or Kilo-calorie). The actual calorie is a tiny value. Where as in Physics and many Engineering Fields the Joule is used. Interestingly this can also vary by nation. I've seen Mexican food packaging with the nutritional information given in Joules. But energy is energy and so surprisingly to me anyway I've seen exercise machines that tell you how many Watts you are producing instead of how many Calories (Kilo-calories actually) you are "burning". Who thinks of nutrition or chemical energy in Watts? I might guess the electrical engineer that designed the electronics and mechanics of the machine.

Therefore Photography has traditions from many fields all with their own peculiar contributions.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

It's closer than you think. Since your camera works in 1/3 stop increments, 1/50 is actually 1/50.8

But if you work in 1/2 step increments, 1/50 is actually 1/45.3

Regardless, the difference is insignificant.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yes, I've taken many photos ages ago, even before I was seriously interested in photography by just following the guide lines Kodak published with each roll or package of film. By the time I had a few years working with various cameras I could and did take photos outdoors with the batteries out of the camera and no handheld meter at all. It was kinda Zen, I just knew or felt how much light was present. Now, I'm talking about B&W film. No way would I guess at a Kodachrome exposure.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

As for lens click stops, I remember my Pentax lenses and Half-stops, and my co-worker's Nikkor lenses (for F & F2) had Third-stops. Today, I can set my cameras to either pattern and also for how it increments ISO and Shutter Speeds.