Inclusion of the word "novices" gives your phrase the certain sense.
Actually, I rather enjoyed bobn's thorough response. I didn't know what it meant to amplify charge, and now I have a better understanding of how things work. Certainly I don't have to know this to take a photo, but it does satisfy a certain curiosity about what is going inside.For the purposes of an explanation to a lay person, and their knowledge of photography, it's all that someone like me has to know.
No offense Bob, but when I explain to lay people how a boiler works, I don't have to describe how heat is absorbed by water, to create steam. It's enough for me to tell people the heat source causes water to boil.
When someone talks about ISO in film they are talking about increasing the actual sensitivity of the sensor (I.e. the film). When we talk about ISO in digital we are talking about a totally different question. It's good to know that raising the ISO does NOT increase the sensitivity of the sensor.
You are correct. I don't always pick the best way of expressing myself. There was no need to include the "novice" qualifier.
If you disagree with my other postings, then the correct response is to post in those threads why you disagree. There is no need for personal attacks.
In the context of the discussion, the added word "signal" clearly meant signal is the noun and light is the adjective. The noun is the subject which is amplified, not the adjective. Any competent English speaker could figure from the context that is what he meant.
Oh, my! Go back to the context why the word signal was added - for clarification of a previous statement, not for additional technical information.
Stop it already, don't play a victim. Nothing personal here, at least from my side.
You should know that most of those threads are locked.
"The job of ISO is merely to amplify the light signal that the camera receives."
That's perfectly fair, but if you don't know it and don't want to know it, stop making statements about it. It was you that chose to introduce terms like 'photon' and 'charge' into the discussion. I apologise for paying you enough respect to assume that when you introduced those you would be interested in discussing the actuality behind them. As it is, the lay person has no reason to even be using those words. Just accept that you have an ISO control and it makes the output lighter for a smaller exposure. That's all you need to know.
So, this is what it is really like. The lay person you are talking to tells you that they read on the web somewhere that the boiler mixes fuel with the water which makes it hot, and since you're adding the fuel, it also increases the pressure. The knob on the front controls how much fuel is mixed into the water. You have a choice now. You either pat them on the head and say yes, that's exactly how it works. That's pretty patronising. So instead you treat them with a little respect, assume that they're capable of learning how it really works, and talk to them a little about combustion and heat exchangers. Then they tell you that for the purposes of using a boiler all they need to know is that the boiler mixes the fuel and the water. Do you not think you might not feel a little exasperated.No offense Bob, but when I explain to lay people how a boiler works, I don't have to describe how heat is absorbed by water, to create steam. It's enough for me to tell people the heat source causes water to boil.
148 posts later, hammering the same thing in. I must say again, amazing.
Yes, I get that, but what does 'light signal' actually mean? It's possible to grammatically string together random adjectives with random vowels. That doesn't mean that they make any sense, and in this case it doesn't make any sense. Maybe you could think about meaning instead of getting hung up on grammar.
But no clarification was added. All that was produced was a word salad. If you think otherwise, explain how the meaning is altered. The sentence is clearly about what is 'received' by the camera. Explain what it is that is received by the camera (without just repeating the phrase 'light signal') and how that is 'amplified'.
ISO is ISO, regardless of medium. It's just a simple way of encoding the exposure needed to produce a middle gray in the final image.
I corrected my improper terminology about amplifying light to amplifying the electric charge.
When someone tells me that heat makes water boil, should I then say, "Well that's not quite right. The heat has to pass through the heat exchanger, in order to be absorbed by the water. That previous models models of heat exchanger absorbed much less of the combustion gases. That modern equipment is able to absorb 90 percent of the fuel combustion, whereas back in the 30's only 40 percent were absorbed."So, this is what it is really like. The lay person you are talking to tells you that they read on the web somewhere that the boiler mixes fuel with the water which makes it hot, and since you're adding the fuel, it also increases the pressure. The knob on the front controls how much fuel is mixed into the water. You have a choice now. You either pat them on the head and say yes, that's exactly how it works. That's pretty patronising. So instead you treat them with a little respect, assume that they're capable of learning how it really works, and talk to them a little about combustion and heat exchangers. Then they tell you that for the purposes of using a boiler all they need to know is that the boiler mixes the fuel and the water. Do you not think you might not feel a little exasperated.No offense Bob, but when I explain to lay people how a boiler works, I don't have to describe how heat is absorbed by water, to create steam. It's enough for me to tell people the heat source causes water to boil.
It is not my statement but as I read it he did not specify the form of the light that actually enters the camera but the light signal was derived from the light received. If you receive an inheritance you do not get the actual dollars your grandma earned.
