Dynamic Range -- what it is, what it's good for, and how much you 'need'

Started Oct 17, 2011 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 24,681
Like?
You.
In reply to boggis the cat, Oct 23, 2011

boggis the cat wrote:

(The argument is currently about "Tonal Range" vs "Dynamic Range", and the claim is that DxO's results must be correct even though they do not make sense in some instances. Bob Newman is arguing a "terminological" difference as the root cause, but appears to not see the underlying issue: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=39659400 )

It is? That's the argument? Becauseas I recall, the argument is about you calling DxOMark's Dr measures "bogus". And what did we find out? That, no, they are not bogus -- you were just full of it, as always:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=39658713

I mean, hell, boggis -- you think that the aperture is the image circle, you think that 4:3 is "more efficient" than 3:2 even for a photo displayed at 3:2 and wider, you think -- well, scratch that -- no, you don't think at all, do you?

Yet you make the pretence of lecturing others. Pathetic.

Just ignorant buffoons like yourself and your fellow entertainers, who don't know squat, and go around making statement like "DxOMark is bogus" without any understanding of what's going on.

Back to ignoring you, I guess.

Excellent!

A shame, as you seemed to be moving toward a more reasonable approach -- a facsimile of a normal human being -- for a while there.

Whereas you are nothing even close to any of that. Now, make good on your "threat", and ignore me -- let those who have an interest and wish to learn, do so.

I mean, seriously -- in what way did your posts in this thread (or Rriley's) contribute in any way, shape, or form, to the understanding of DR? All you did was disrupt this thread with your posturing BS right from your very first post in this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=39616072

What Joe's good for, and how much we don't need him

But wait, Joe, isn't it all about "total light"?

How is it that an APS-C system can out-perform a 135 system? The 135 system has more total light.

Oh, this must be an example of reality kicking theory square in the wedding tackle. Thanks for clearing that up

Well, it's just as well you posted this, as I'm sure that nobody on the OSTF had any idea what DR was.

Clown.

That was your entry into this thread, and you have the stones to say to me, "A shame, as you seemed to be moving toward a more reasonable approach -- a facsimile of a normal human being -- for a while there."

Boggis, please make good on your "threat" to ignore me.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
MathNew
You.New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow