They are?
The files from my Sigma fp, which is said to have a Sony sensor that is probably the one in the A7III, are very easy to process in my old copy of Photoshop. I do have to start by shifting the black point.
It is indeed. A horrible botch.
It would certainly be nice if manufacturers gave us a choice as to what analog gain is used for various ISO settings, but the idea that current sensors could have a single gain and still have optimal high-ISO/low-exposure is misgiven, IMO. Graphs of noise vs ISO are not necessarily indicative of true, visible ISO-invariance. Many cameras have significant spatially-correlated post-gain noise that may not be a problem with most images over 3 or 4 stops of push, but to get ISO 102K from the analog gain suitable for ISO 100 means multiplying that post-gain noise about 1024x. You also need great precision in blackpoints with a push like that, and I suspect that it is easier to get the correct mean blackpoint when much more analog gain is used for higher ISO settings, especially considering how manufacturers have been calibrating color channels with dirty integer math.
Having an ISO control at all is an unnecessary complication. The camera has all the information it needs to automatically select a suitable rendering curve for the exposure that has been used. Of course, human intelligence can sometimes do better, which is the reason for manual controls, but it makes sense to make those manual controls direct, rather than combinations of parameters.
Once you decouple the gain control, then it raises the question why have an ISO control at all.
My astro cameras use commercial image sensors and ISO is replaced by gain. But - when I change the gain I also have to adjust the offset for better results.
Iliah is probably the one to answer this. My impression is tat you're right in some cases, wrong in others.
Different camera manufactures address this differently (some don't address it at all in certain models). IMHO for best results offsets need to be adjusted on per pixel basis (flats), and even then it's "the best guess", since deep shadows are not always linear, while flare exists.
Thank you, got me one step further - the then some part seems to go even deeper than the gain and offset part. Have to dig further...
Careful. Let's not go there. I find it to be very useful, and usually convenient. The curves tool, in particular -- which I use on almost every photo -- is better than on any other program I have used. Like all fully featured graphics programs, you do have to learn how to use it.
Wrong understanding of 'post'. the term is either 'post-processing' or 'post-production'. 'Post' means after, so 'post is short either for that which happens after processing or that which happens after production. The latter really applies to the movie industry, so for still it means that which happens after processing, which is what he said.
I thought in movies postproduction was everything that happened after the film was shot.
Please see in my post
right above:
