Porky89

Porky89

Lives in United Kingdom Auchtermuchty, United Kingdom
Works as a Retired
Joined on Sep 14, 2016

Porky89's recent activity

  • No it isn't. Shot noise is dependent on the intensity of light falling on the sensor no matter what its area is. No it doesn't. And exactly the same shot noise, everything else being equal and ...
  • Nonsense. More light over a proportionately greater area results in exactly the same shot noise per unit area and therefore the same average shot noise over the entire image, all else being equal. ...
  • Not true. No. No. Are you sure you intended to post this in the Beginners Questions forum? Let's hope it isn't the start of yet another pointless, bad-tempered Equivalence debate. :-(
  • Don't start that again! The pseudoscientists are always ready to pounce on the heretics! :-D
  • I am sure we are all relieved to hear that, sir.
  • Replied in RAW files
    Yes. If you select RAW + JPG.
  • Replied in RAW files
    Simply go into Settings and select RAW or RAW + JPG to record either RAW or RAW and JPG photos.
  • Replied in Image cropping
    Ah, right. So how exactly does trimming an inch off all round and eight by ten print alter the DOF, SNR and general image quality of the print? I am intrigued!
  • Replied in Image cropping
    That's strange, when I crop a picture the DOF and SNR remain exactly the same. I must have cropped images to different degrees many thousands of times over the years and never noticed any change ...
  • Replied in Ironically...
    You don't half spout some drivel, Bob. If a sensor has a signal to noise ratio of x per unit area then it has exactly the same signal to noise ratio for every unit area and therefore for the ...
  • Very funny. Once again you resort to absurdities in an attempt to cover your embarrassment and confusion. You will be offering links back to your previous posts in this thread next as scientific ...
  • Replied in Ironically...
    I have no problem whatsoever with the paper cited by FingerPainter. But where exactly does it talk about the effect of the size of the sensor on shot noise? Nowhere!
  • Replied in Ironically...
    As you know perfectly well, that paper not only doesn't mention the size of the sensor or the total light that it receives anywhere but specifically refers to the light falling on a given area of ...
  • Replied in Ironically...
    That is not a scientific paper, it is an article by a journalist who starts off by calling the subject a "contentious issue", goes on to admit there are many factors at play and offers no ...
  • Replied in Wow. Just wow.
    I am sorry, Joe, but that is pretty lame stuff. Obfuscation is one thing but simply refusing to defend your theory due to lack of evidence and resorting to this kind of infantile nonsense to cover ...
  • Replied in Ironically...
    I think we can take it from that response that you have already followed my suggestion about searching for papers on shot noise or image noise that mention total light or the size of the sensor ...
  • Replied in Wow. Just wow.
    No, what is unbelievable is that you think that 4 times the light spread over a sensor 4 times the area makes any difference to the visual properties of the photo - without any scientific basis ...
  • Replied in Why ?
    :-D
  • Replied in Why ?
    Your po-faced outrage is hilarious, Joe!
  • You keep saying that, but you never explain why all that matters is the total amount of light making up the duck. Considering that that statement is the very basis of your theory of Total Light ...
Activity older than 12 months is not displayed.
Total messages 600
Threads started 6
Last post 1 week ago
Total comments 27
Total likes 60
Last post 4 months ago
Total reviews 0
Entries 0
Votes cast 0
Photos uploaded 0