How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:36:40 -0700, SMS wrote:

On 11/07/10 8:16 AM, Bruce wrote:

snip

However, I do recognise that probably99% of digital camera users
have not the faintest idea what dynamic range is, nor why it is so
important. All they seem to understand, and judge cameras by, is the
numbers of megapixels that are crammed on to their very tiny sensors.

Which is why RAW support was dropped from most P&S models. Canon even
dropped RAW from their G series for one generation (the G7) which was
pretty stupid considering the target market for that line is people who
actually do know what dynamic range is. Thank goodness for CHDK.

It's rather ironic that the cameras with the worst dynamic range, that
would benefit the most from RAW, usually don't have RAW, while the
D-SLRs all have it but don't gain (in terms of percentages) nearly as
much dynamic range as the P&S models.


It's rather ironic that you don't know what the **** you are talking about,
yet you insist on spewing your role-playing pretend-photographer's supreme
ignorance upon the world and somehow think that those who actually OWN
cameras would swallow your bull****.


The new APS-C mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras should have good
dynamic range. They'll still lack some of the other advantages of D-SLRs
though.

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:36:40 -0700, SMS wrote:

On 11/07/10 8:16 AM, Bruce wrote:

snip

However, I do recognise that probably99% of digital camera users
have not the faintest idea what dynamic range is, nor why it is so
important. All they seem to understand, and judge cameras by, is the
numbers of megapixels that are crammed on to their very tiny sensors.

Which is why RAW support was dropped from most P&S models. Canon even
dropped RAW from their G series for one generation (the G7) which was
pretty stupid considering the target market for that line is people who
actually do know what dynamic range is. Thank goodness for CHDK.

Yes, thank goodness for CHDK, because we found out WHY they dropped RAW
support in many of these P&S cameras. Do you know why? No you don't. You
just proved that.

IT IS BECAUSE THE FULL DYNAMIC RANGE WAS ALREADY BEING REPRESENTED IN THE
JPG OUTPUT OF THESE CAMERAS. IF YOU DO THAT PROPERLY *IN-CAMERA* THEN
THERE'S NO NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA. (Except in only rare
situations that are far beyond the average photographer, e.g.
astrophotography. And certainly of zero use to the snapshooters and
crapshooters, like those that infest these newsgroups who pretend to be
"pros", what a laugh.) THESE INEXPENSIVE BUT HIGH-QUALITY CAMERAS DO
SOMETHING BETTER THAN ALL DSLRS CAN EVER DO, THEY DO THE RAW TO JPG
CONVERSION PROPERLY IN-CAMERA.

Proving ONCE AGAIN, that you have NEVER BEEN NEAR *ANY* CAMERA THAT USES
CHDK AND HAVE NEVER FOLLOWED ANY PART OF ITS DEVELOPMENT OR YOU WOULD KNOW
THIS ABOUT ALL CHDK COMPATIBLE CAMERAS.


It's rather ironic that the cameras with the worst dynamic range, that
would benefit the most from RAW, usually don't have RAW, while the
D-SLRs all have it but don't gain (in terms of percentages) nearly as
much dynamic range as the P&S models.


It's rather ironic that you don't know what the **** you are talking about,
yet you insist on spewing your role-playing pretend-photographer's supreme
ignorance upon the world and somehow think that those who actually OWN
cameras would swallow your bull****.


The new APS-C mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras should have good
dynamic range. They'll still lack some of the other advantages of D-SLRs
though.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:20:09 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:02:25 -0700 (PDT), in
, -hh
wrote:

On Jul 9, 1:05*pm, nospam wrote:
In article , John Navas

wrote:
The automotive analogy here is also illustrative: *take a look at our
car's sound system controls: *originally, our old analog radio systems
used a dial-based volume control ... a potentiometer. *With
digitalization, this analog dial component was replaced with up/down
pushbuttons. * But look now at today's controls and we find that
they've gotten rid of the volume pushbuttons and *gone back to a human
interface for the radio's volume control that's once again a dial.
Hmmm...

Mine has buttons for stations, seek and scan, plus buttons on the
steering wheel for station change. *I can't remember the last time
I twisted a volume knob. *I'm guessing they are for Luddites that can't
learn new things.

pejorative comment noted.

And yet John conveniently failed to mention how his car's radio's
**volume** control is actually performed.

The volume I use is two pushbuttons on the steering wheel.

What a weasel. Is there, or is there not, a volume knob on the radio?


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

In article , John Navas
wrote:

From a UI perspective, buttons are better for some things, but that
doesn't automatically mean that a 'button' UI is better for ALL
inputs. The exercise is left to the reader to go replace a car's
steering _wheel_ with Left & Right buttons :-)

Fly by wire with a joystick works quite well, and has been used in some
cars.

right on cue.

On 7/12/10 11:02 AM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , John Navas
wrote:

From a UI perspective, buttons are better for some things, but that
doesn't automatically mean that a 'button' UI is better for ALL
inputs. The exercise is left to the reader to go replace a car's
steering _wheel_ with Left & Right buttons :-)

Fly by wire with a joystick works quite well, and has been used in some
cars.

right on cue.

Pavlov Puppet is NavASS...

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:20:09 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:02:25 -0700 (PDT), in
, -hh
wrote:

On Jul 9, 1:05 pm, nospam wrote:
In article , John Navas

wrote:
The automotive analogy here is also illustrative: take a look at our
car's sound system controls: originally, our old analog radio
systems
used a dial-based volume control ... a potentiometer. With
digitalization, this analog dial component was replaced with up/down
pushbuttons. But look now at today's controls and we find that
they've gotten rid of the volume pushbuttons and gone back to a
human
interface for the radio's volume control that's once again a dial.
Hmmm...

Mine has buttons for stations, seek and scan, plus buttons on the
steering wheel for station change. I can't remember the last time
I twisted a volume knob. I'm guessing they are for Luddites that
can't
learn new things.

pejorative comment noted.

And yet John conveniently failed to mention how his car's radio's
**volume** control is actually performed.

The volume I use is two pushbuttons on the steering wheel.

What a weasel. Is there, or is there not, a volume knob on the radio?



He's playing with his joystick

--
Peter