Let's Put the Exposure Triangle Aside
Apr 27, 2016 15:27:44 #
wilsondl2 wrote:
If you want to forget the whole thing just do like "The Famous Weegee" did and use a Press #5 flashbulb at f/16 and camera focus at 10' and think only of composition. - Dave
Certainly. I think the concept of the exposure triangle was flawed.
Apr 27, 2016 16:14:23 #
BebuLamar wrote:
Certainly. I think the concept of the exposure triangle was flawed.
Uh? Since who?
Our friend here offers a new way to think about it, nothing else.
The only thing that is flawed when it comes to ISO in digital camera is that it is different from the ISO as we had it in the film era.
ISO now refers to a sensor sensitivity to light and varies from sensor to sensor. The ISO before was the sensitivity of a film to light (ISO/TC 42 photography), a known, reliable value. The ISO standard for photographic sensors has not been fixed...
I have yet to see two cameras (Brand/series) giving the same result when shooting (raw) the exact same scene in manual with the exact same settings.
So, if there is a flaw, it is not in the exposition triangle but in the measurement and publication/claim/brag of it.
linked article wrote:
LinkThe ISO standard ISO 12232:2006(60) gives digital still camera manufacturers a choice of five different techniques for determining the exposure index rating at each sensitivity setting provided by a particular camera model.
This is where the method given by the op enters into play.
Apr 27, 2016 16:44:49 #
rmalarz wrote:
Dave, thanks for reading and commenting. Yup, we're dealing with three things here. It was just another way of looking at it.
--Bob
--Bob
What did I miss?!
I don't see ANYTHING different here.
3 points is 3 points, whether they are in a circle, a straight line, stacked or a triangle.
There seems to be a sudden need here on the Hog to try and reinvent the wheel.
We can come up with a 100 different ways to diagram 3 things, and it's still the same 3 things!
A rose by any other name is STILL a rose!!!
Maybe you can manage to make a turnip out of it!! :lol:
SS
Apr 27, 2016 16:55:03 #
SharpShooter wrote:
What did I miss?!
I don't see ANYTHING different here.
3 points is 3 points, whether they are in a circle, a straight line, stacked or a triangle.
There seems to be a sudden need here on the Hog to try and reinvent the wheel.
We can come up with a 100 different ways to diagram 3 things, and it's still the same 3 things!
A rose by any other name is STILL a rose!!!
Maybe you can manage to make a turnip out of it!! :lol:
SS
I don't see ANYTHING different here.
3 points is 3 points, whether they are in a circle, a straight line, stacked or a triangle.
There seems to be a sudden need here on the Hog to try and reinvent the wheel.
We can come up with a 100 different ways to diagram 3 things, and it's still the same 3 things!
A rose by any other name is STILL a rose!!!
Maybe you can manage to make a turnip out of it!! :lol:
SS
SS, I'm not trying to reinvent anything. With some of the posts I've read, there seemed to be some who had a bit of trouble with the exposure triangle concept. I thought a bit of a different approach to explaining how the three pieces fit together might be helpful.
Obviously, this post is not for everyone. There are some it might help. For those who are thoroughly versed in this, I say do like I do when I see liver in the meat dept. of my grocery store, I keep walking. What I don't do is criticize the grocer for stocking it.
--Bob
Apr 27, 2016 17:23:58 #
rmalarz wrote:
SS, I'm not trying to reinvent anything. With some... (show quote)
Bob, had you put this into the start of your post, I would have understood perfectly and would not have felt a need to comment, and in fact may even had commented and added that anything that helps those having trouble understanding any given concept/example, it could be a good thing.
But you included no explanation, that I saw, and just presented the triangle in a different way.
And coming on the heels of all the ETTR hoopla, it's pretty easy to misconstrue any re-presented long standing concept. A new member could read it, get it, then start seeing references to the ET and start to wonder if it's two different concepts.
It's not walking by the meat isle and ignoring the grocers choice to carry liver. It's more like having shopped here since the store opened and somewhat knowing most of the patrons and the grocer and one day there is suddenly liver on the shelves when since the store opened there had not been....., and stopping and asking the grocer why he suddenly started to carry liver!! ;-)
SS
Apr 27, 2016 17:29:19 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Bob, had you put this into the start of your post,... (show quote)
SS, thanks for pointing that out. I'll keep that in mind for the next post that might be a topic aimed at a particular group of members. I appreciate your follow up explanation.
--Bob
Apr 27, 2016 18:12:27 #
SharpShooter wrote:
.../... then start seeing references to the ET and start to wonder if .../...
That guy did not go home????
Apr 27, 2016 20:34:31 #
Coming from an electronics background, I've always looked at the exposure triangle as similar to the relationship between current, voltage, resistance, and power. No confusion here.
Apr 27, 2016 20:37:36 #
n3eg wrote:
Coming from an electronics background, I've always looked at the exposure triangle as similar to the relationship between current, voltage, resistance, and power. No confusion here.
Uh? P=UI.. U=RI... RII=P four elements here... not three.
Apr 28, 2016 06:21:47 #
boberic wrote:
Actually, some were still available in the early '80's. I played around with them a little as they were much more powerful then flash units and allowed longer range shots. You just had to learn to like that old press photographer look of harsh light.Flash bulb? Where do you find them? I thinkn the last one was made in the 60's
Apr 28, 2016 06:43:39 #
I think you've just re-invented the concept of exposure value (EV)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value
Apr 28, 2016 06:43:59 #
I think you've just re-invented the concept of exposure value (EV)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value
Sorry for double post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value
Sorry for double post
Apr 28, 2016 06:57:17 #
Apr 28, 2016 07:21:31 #
Apr 28, 2016 07:45:34 #
wilsondl2 wrote:
If you want to forget the whole thing just do like "The Famous Weegee" did and use a Press #5 flashbulb at f/16 and camera focus at 10' and think only of composition. - Dave
But then again, this was sheet film and they developed by inspection.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.