more pixels are better!

Started Dec 14, 2008 | Discussions thread
Iliah Borg Forum Pro • Posts: 29,045
Arguing against photography

He is in fact arguing not against me, but against photographic use of the image. Not an isolated attempt to isolate an issue or a parameter to the point where it become totally irrelevant. Can't see forest for a tree.

Deep and widening gap between photography practice (and photography needs) and pixel peeping is very discouraging. Noise is one of the parameters that are easiest to measure, may be even the easiest one given current level of expertise of the peepers. Now that calibrationists can't even make a decent shot of a brick wall to compare resolution (and even less so - a decent shot of a decent resolution target) all we hear is noise. Noise, dynamic range, headroom in highlights is mostly all that we have here, and I'm yet to see any dissertation comparing current status of raw converters even in that regards, because needs for the output is totally ignored. Quality of midtones - they are not interested to find ways to describe and measure it. Plasticity of the image? - no. Same, colour is ignored. Same, artefacts, like moire, maze, are not evaluated. And even when they are discussing their pet peeve, noise, very little practical advice can be gathered from those boring discussions. Practical value of such discussions is dangerously close to a zero.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
thw
cpw
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow