"Crop-ability" of images?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 19,317
Re: Exposure vs Exposure

john isaacs wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

john isaacs wrote:

Well, I put up some links, and I'm perfectly happy with them.

For myself, I suggest that ISO and Kodak trumps 'Cambridge in Colour' and Adobe. Another bit from the Kodak Sensitometry workbook, in the glossary they give, for people that are unfamiliar with the terms:

Okay, here's the thing. We seem to be talking about two different things that are defined by the same word. For you, Exposure is a quantitative value that is the amount light that reaches the sensor when capturing an image. For me, Exposure is the (v.) act of capturing and image, or (n.) the actual image.

When I talk about an exposure, I am talking about the image, and when I talk about exposure settings, I am talking about the camera settings that were used to capture the image. And those are shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and Exposure Compensation if non-zero.

I have no idea under what circumstances you would use the term Exposure, or how you would use it without mentioning ISO. But you can explain that for yourself.

I've provided links that define and illustrate the use of the term Exposure as I and others mean it. When I use the term, it is always clear what is meant.

The problem, as I see it, is that you are not satisfied with this, and want to correct people in the use of the term Exposure. But you don't provide a satisfactory substitution, you just say "that's wrong". Well, that is not useful, and in fact it is not necessary, either. You are not the "word police". If you have something constructive to say, rather than to simply correct the use of this word, then say it. Nit-picking over the use of Exposure is neither helpful, nor civil.

Feel free to explain how your use of the term Exposure is useful. Stop trying to correct other peoples use of the term; there are enough definitions out there to prove that their use is valid. And if you think there is something helpful to be said, then go right ahead.

For me; I'm sticking with the use of Exposure that communicates what I mean to say. Works for me.

me to , doesnt make sense or for any practical purpose without iso. other wise why does dpr exif data include iso if it didnt matter.

Don

-- hide signature --

Sony A7r2 , A6300
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1, em5mk2, em1mk2.

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