dpreview also tries to teach the trolls about ISO/aperture :)

On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 19:55:43 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Eric Stevens:
Same logical errors.

Sandman:
Same hot air from the trolls of rpd

I could explain it but it requires diagrams which I can't put on rpd
and it requires algebra which is too complicated to be published in
a text news group. One day I might produce it as a PDF, but it's
quite a lot of work.

Like I said - more hot air from the trolls. :-D

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group, seem to want
to claim there is no way to convey something other than text here :-D

Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group. If I want
to explain things properly I *have* to use diagrams and mathematical
symbols.

that explains why posts don't include links to photos.

oh wait...

Links to photographs are irrelevant, as you should know.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 21:47:03 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article .com,
Savageduck wrote:

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group, seem to
want
to claim there is no way to convey something other than text here :-D

Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group. If I want
to explain things properly I *have* to use diagrams and mathematical
symbols.

that explains why posts don't include links to photos.

oh wait...

I guess you better wait, seeing as it is your posts which never include links
to photos.
Your photos anyway.

according to eric, it's a text only group and that would be against the
rules.

Attachments are OK.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 11 Sep 2017 05:36:25 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Same logical errors.

Sandman:
Same hot air from the trolls of rpd

Eric Stevens:
I could explain it but it requires diagrams which I can't put on
rpd and it requires algebra which is too complicated to be
published in a text news group. One day I might produce it as a
PDF, but it's quite a lot of work.

Sandman:
Like I said - more hot air from the trolls. :-D

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group,
seem to want to claim there is no way to convey something other
than text here :-D

Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group.

Yes, rec.PHOTO.digital is text-only, which has been a problem for all the
photographers here that hasn't managed to find a way to share their
photographies in any way, shape or form. We're all stuck trying to describe
our photos using words to get feedback. :-D

Attachments are OK. Images included in text are not, as I am sure you
know.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

On 11 Sep 2017 05:36:25 GMT, Sandman wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Same logical errors.

Sandman:
Same hot air from the trolls of rpd

Eric Stevens:
I could explain it but it requires diagrams which I can't put on
rpd and it requires algebra which is too complicated to be
published in a text news group. One day I might produce it as a
PDF, but it's quite a lot of work.

Sandman:
Like I said - more hot air from the trolls. :-D

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group,
seem to want to claim there is no way to convey something other
than text here :-D

Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group.

Yes, rec.PHOTO.digital is text-only, which has been a problem for all the
photographers here that hasn't managed to find a way to share their
photographies in any way, shape or form. We're all stuck trying to describe
our photos using words to get feedback. :-D

Attachments are OK. Images included in text are not, as I am sure you
know.

Attachments are not OK. That would make the post a binary such and those
are so nonononoooo! :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group, seem to
want to claim there is no way to convey something other than text here :-D

Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group. If I want
to explain things properly I *have* to use diagrams and mathematical
symbols.

that explains why posts don't include links to photos.

oh wait...

I guess you better wait, seeing as it is your posts which never include
links to photos.
Your photos anyway.

according to eric, it's a text only group and that would be against the
rules.

Attachments are OK.

no they absolutely are *not* ok, as this is *not* a binary newsgroup.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group.

Yes, rec.PHOTO.digital is text-only, which has been a problem for all the
photographers here that hasn't managed to find a way to share their
photographies in any way, shape or form. We're all stuck trying to describe
our photos using words to get feedback. :-D

Attachments are OK. Images included in text are not, as I am sure you
know.

you clearly don't.

On 11/09/2017 17:10, Whisky-dave wrote:
[....]

Some of my first illegal software was posted on binary groups.

When did you stop using illegal software, Dave?

--
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick
themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.� (Winston S.
Churchill)

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Sandman:
snip

Eric Stevens:
Those pixels in the unit area don't care what
is happening in the neighbouring unit area. All that matters
to them is the amount of light which falls upon them.

Sandman:
They are also not more "sensitive" depending on your
ISO settings. They are fixed. With less total light, the
signal needs to be amplified more to match the brightness of
the film ISO emulation step.

Eric Stevens:
Agreed.

Sandman:
Finally

No, not finally. Not at all while you twist words the way you have
in your reply.

Honesty is the best policy. Yours isn't even the next best.

....said the troll, while still trying to attempt he has anything to put up
against the cold hard facts. Funny stuff

--
Sandman

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Same logical errors.

Sandman:
Same hot air from the trolls of rpd

Eric Stevens:
I could explain it but it requires diagrams
which I can't put on rpd and it requires algebra which is
too complicated to be published in a text news group. One
day I might produce it as a PDF, but it's quite a lot of
work.

Sandman:
Like I said - more hot air from the trolls. :-D

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group,
seem to want to claim there is no way to convey something
other than text here :-D

Eric Stevens:
Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group.

Sandman:
Yes, rec.PHOTO.digital is text-only, which has been a problem for
all the photographers here that hasn't managed to find a way to
share their photographies in any way, shape or form. We're all
stuck trying to describe our photos using words to get feedback.
:-D

Attachments are OK. Images included in text are not, as I am sure
you know.

Yes, this has - as I said - been a huge problem for this group, where there
has been no way conceivable to relay information other than purely text-based
to other posters, and all photos we have taken we've had to describe using
only words because there is no way to make another post to view any content
from us other than pure text.

Bummer, why did they even create this group to begin with, since it's
impossible to share anything but text, huh?

--
Sandman

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens:
Same logical errors.

Sandman:
Same hot air from the trolls of rpd

Eric Stevens:
I could explain it but it requires diagrams which I can't
put on rpd and it requires algebra which is too complicated
to be published in a text news group. One day I might
produce it as a PDF, but it's quite a lot of work.

Sandman:
Like I said - more hot air from the trolls. :-D

And it's also ironic that Eric, in a photography usenet group,
seem to want to claim there is no way to convey something
other than text here :-D

Eric Stevens:
Please read my words again. RPD is a text-only news group. If I
want to explain things properly I *have* to use diagrams and
mathematical symbols.

nospam:
that explains why posts don't include links to photos.

oh wait...

Links to photographs are irrelevant, as you should know.

...said Eric, when he realised that his entire premise for not being able to
support his claim was shot down. Oops.

--
Sandman