I have downladed and pushed the shadows of test images from the canon d30 and the results were nothing short of amazing.
pushed 4 stops
D30
GFx 100
The phrase “not even wrong” is a critique in scientific and philosophical discussions. It means that a claim or idea is so ill-posed, incoherent, or misframed that it can’t even be evaluated; it fails to meet the minimum standard of being falsifiable. It was popularized by physicist Wolfgang Pauli.
A statement is “not even wrong” if:
- It’s vague, non-testable, or internally inconsistent
- It doesn’t make concrete predictions that could be checked
- It misuses terminology in ways that render it meaningless in context
I think Richard has explained the main issues.
explain these 2 black level comparrisions when pushed, the d30 clearly out performs the values in the shadows. the smaller pixels have crushed the information.
I've just found that motorbike picture in the review and I don't think we published the Raw file. Are you trying to assess DR from JPEGs?
Because, as I say, most standard JPEGs use tone curves to convey about 8.5 or so EV of dynamic range, discarding everything beyond that.
Trying to assess DR by pushing JPEGs is like smashing sets of crockery and trying to guess how maleable the clay they were made from was, before they were fired.
Richard - DPReview.com
the histograms are near identical from a pushed gfx100 raw file vers jpeg, im wanting to see the extra 6 stops of DR demonstrated. to be honest id take the d30 jpeg over the raw gfx 100 file till someone can clearly show 6 stops difference when it starts behind from the start
First people have been trying to teach you the difference between the histogram you are showing as it is not a raw histogram and is of the processed raw data that has been placed with in a color space.
I know of at least 7 threads started over various platform that you have not learned the difference, until you fully understand what those extra stops of DR mean and how that relates to what is captured in the raw file I feel it will be the very same runaround many of us have dealt with the past 10 years and trying to tell you what that extra DR is and how it relates to how we process that data into the color space you are trying to display that data in.
In one final attempt to show you where this extra DR comes into play
In the red box the image data falls well below the DR that can be displayed in the color space in the tonal ranges that are held within the standard tonal range.
When we are discussing the DR of the sensor and how much is recorded, we are talking about the range of the lightest to the darkest data being collected with floor to the lowest signal determined by a noise level.
We are then compressing that range of DR into the color space we are going to display that data in. That red patch was well below the 0,0,0 color space with its placement in the raw data. We then compress that to how we want to display that tonal range of the raw data
your red box is showing 19 19 19 its not below at all.
You know what you have done when reading the RGB values in that red box area?
You are measuring the values of a screen grab on a viewer in a nonsensical way derived that the value is 19,19,19 in the limited range of that grab and its color space.
What you should be looking at is the recorded values shown in the histogram, those values that show -8 to -11 that is the signal that was recorded by the sensor telling us that it is -8 to -10 stops from 0ev with a total of -10 to -12 from the full saturation of what the sensor can record. Clearly you do not understand what is being shown here yet again you should really look at what is being presented to you and let it sink in as to what is being shown.
These are values that cannot be shown in the limited DR of the color space and needs to develop to compress this into the limited color space
the d30 image lowest black is 12 12 12
the myth that the incamera histogram doesnt equal the raw , i disproved that 2 years ago. i just shot an image with the histogram just clipping the blacks and the reading was 0 1 1
Not this again, without understanding what is shown above how can you make such a statement again?
there will never be true black
what is black? is it the lowest signal a sensor can record? or is it what we classify black as within the tonal range of a printed image?
in a high contrast scene ,lens veiling glare takes care of that.
And yet I have an image that is a high contrast image with a DR of 11 stops and lens veiling glare is not a problem
Those trees that are contained within the red box has been lifted several stops placing those tones within the final image into a range showing color and contrast. How can this be if it is as you say it is.
so i have used the k100d for years long ago and only ever shot jpeg with it ,so after horseshacks comment i deceided to go into my studio and simulate the exposure and lighting from a past pentax image and shoot it with my a6700. these were shot at base iso , the pentax k100 image lifted is nothing short of amazing, bigger pixels win and its just a fact period. i love my a6700 but as far as lifted shadowed skin tones with indoor ambiant lighting and sunny day in a window behind subjects the k100 plays a hard game, how these DR measurments are anywhere near correct is beyond me which is what this thread is about.
