"Equivalence" demonstrated: Canon 5D and Panasonic GX1

Started Apr 27, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 20,694
Like?
Re: "Equivalence" is not "Equivalence" - try a new terminology.
In reply to pavinder, Apr 29, 2013

pavinder wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Similarly to say "these 2 photos are visually equivalent but not technically equivalent" is far more helpful than to just argue about whether they are "equivalent" under some all-encompassing definition.

So, what are your parameters for "visually equivalent" and what are your parameters for "technically equivalent"?  I mean, next thing we know we're going to be talking all sorts of "equivalences" for size, weight, price, AF speed/accuracy, build, etc., etc., etc.

Visually equivalent - very simple.  And exactly what it says. They look the same.

Framing, perspective, what's in focus and what's not, what's light, what's dark, etc.

In other words if you showed someone the 2 photos, they would look and think "yes, it's the same photo".

Well, that's basically Equivalence as I've defined it, then:  same perspective, framing, DOF, shutter speed (motion blur), and display size.

What's not included is: noise, resolution, dynamic range, color, etc., although these can also be accounted for with additional assumptions about the technology.  However, the five parameters I use for Equivalence are independent of the technology.

I would think that this is, for most photographers, what's important.  It will answer the question "Can X camera take a shot that looks the same as Y camera?"

Technically equivalent - very simple.  They have the same quantitative technical details.

And this could of course be seperated into IQ-related details (noise levels, size, etc) and settings-related details (aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc).

Clearly these settings-related details have more direct effect on the visual properties of the photo that the IQ-related details.  But (because they're quantitative, not qualitative) they're still distinct from the aesthetic details which determine visual equivalence.

I dunno.  From where I'm sitting, I think "Equivalent" meaning same perspective, framing, DOF, shutter speed, and display size is pretty much the most "natural" use of the word with respect to photography.

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