hailrazer said:
What you're saying is NOT true.
2 different cameras with the same settings (iso, aperture, exposure...) will give very very similar results.
Seriously, all you'd have to do is post two shots of the same scene with your different cameras (using the same settings). It wouldn't take 5 mins.
Repost:
I might agree for some part of that, but I think it will show off the essence of if a photo is really dark, or if the corners are dark etc. If someone uses over 1 second, it looks perfect, but might be dark in reality. Using the .5s will give a fairly base line we can go by I believe. So yes, maybe the pics will look different in color and stuff, but I think we can compare easier, than someone using .5 and someone else using 2 seconds. Agreed?
I might agree for some part of that, but I think it will show off the essence of if a photo is really dark, or if the corners are dark etc. If someone uses over 1 second, it looks perfect, but might be dark in reality. Using the .5s will give a fairly base line we can go by I believe. So yes, maybe the pics will look different in color and stuff, but I think we can compare easier, than someone using .5 and someone else using 2 seconds. Agreed?
Oh yea I agree with you.
I just know for a fact that different cameras WITH THE SAME SETTINGS can and will show varying colors and brightness.
It's a frustration I've had to deal with when taking pics of my projector after changes , trying to show the difference. I would take a pic at my standard Iso100, 1 sec settings, put in a new reflector and measure an increase in lumens at about 10% and then take a second pic and it be darker. Then re-take the pic and it would look brighter.
So I started borrowing cameras and noticed that even at the same settings I would get different brightness levels and colors. It was really frustrating.
I just know for a fact that different cameras WITH THE SAME SETTINGS can and will show varying colors and brightness.
It's a frustration I've had to deal with when taking pics of my projector after changes , trying to show the difference. I would take a pic at my standard Iso100, 1 sec settings, put in a new reflector and measure an increase in lumens at about 10% and then take a second pic and it be darker. Then re-take the pic and it would look brighter.
So I started borrowing cameras and noticed that even at the same settings I would get different brightness levels and colors. It was really frustrating.
Ok I understand ur frustration,
But is there any way you could post 2 sequential pics from the same camera that show different brightness levels you're talking about.
I'd hedge my bets that the camera has automatically changed the f value to let more light in the brighter pics. If you set a fixed f value and don't let the camera automatically adjust for that then the results wont be as erratic.
But is there any way you could post 2 sequential pics from the same camera that show different brightness levels you're talking about.
I'd hedge my bets that the camera has automatically changed the f value to let more light in the brighter pics. If you set a fixed f value and don't let the camera automatically adjust for that then the results wont be as erratic.
I would tend to agree on that, because the same camera can't have different outputs if the settings are exactly the same. It can't happen without a problem with the camera. I don't need pics, but you need to run tests to see why your camera is changing. the same camera should always result in similar pics. If not "Problem"
But that's what I'm saying. I don't think it's a bad camera just an older camera.
Have you noticed in the LL Forums how many people use an older camera and the pics look terrible and even after advice on what settings to use they still look terrible. And then they go and buy a new camera and use the settings they were advised to use and the pics look wonderful. I've seen it happen that way several times.
That's why I disagree with saying "Use this setting and we can compare brightness levels"
Have you noticed in the LL Forums how many people use an older camera and the pics look terrible and even after advice on what settings to use they still look terrible. And then they go and buy a new camera and use the settings they were advised to use and the pics look wonderful. I've seen it happen that way several times.
That's why I disagree with saying "Use this setting and we can compare brightness levels"
Don't forget about the lens used on the camera. Different cameras with the same settings of film type and aperature speed may have different results if the lens on the camera is "faster" (allows more light through). Very good cameras have a lens of f1.2 , average lens is f2.8 and so on. Look on the end of your lens and it should have what f type it is. I have a 35mm canon slr with a f1.8 lens. I used 800 speed film shot at 1 sec exposure with a tripod for the pictures of my big screen on the Proxima 944.
You can see the pictures at this link
http://mysite.verizon.net/yub_yump/
You can see the pictures at this link
http://mysite.verizon.net/yub_yump/
!!Just a few cents on photography:
There are all kind of cameras, but I believe most digital cameras people are using in the DIYPJs forums are the compact type, which is the most common to the regular user. These kind of camera, besides all of the auto-setting problem they can have, trying to perform better on any light conditions without the user agreement, we also have the problem of post-processing. This may include anything the manufacturer wants, like equalization (something like an auto-contrast), color balance and other algorithms that can change the initial image.
Now I'm not saying all the cameras do this in a way it would ruin the comparison shots, I don't know how this kind of thing is implemented, but there's one thing for sure: if your camera doesn't output the raw data from the CCD, you can't be sure of what happened to the initial image data. The raw output is a feature more common in the high-end cameras, or in a few of the mid-level I think. Also, atleast in my camera, there's only JPEG output, which is another way of removing even more data of your image, even tho JPEG compressing will hardly mess with the brightness levels.
I wouldn't go on about equal settings getting very similar results on all cameras, there's much to it than just that, or else every camera with the same settings would be producing comparable pictures despite the price, which is not true, that's why we choose our cameras very thoughtfully, or atleast I do.
There are all kind of cameras, but I believe most digital cameras people are using in the DIYPJs forums are the compact type, which is the most common to the regular user. These kind of camera, besides all of the auto-setting problem they can have, trying to perform better on any light conditions without the user agreement, we also have the problem of post-processing. This may include anything the manufacturer wants, like equalization (something like an auto-contrast), color balance and other algorithms that can change the initial image.
Now I'm not saying all the cameras do this in a way it would ruin the comparison shots, I don't know how this kind of thing is implemented, but there's one thing for sure: if your camera doesn't output the raw data from the CCD, you can't be sure of what happened to the initial image data. The raw output is a feature more common in the high-end cameras, or in a few of the mid-level I think. Also, atleast in my camera, there's only JPEG output, which is another way of removing even more data of your image, even tho JPEG compressing will hardly mess with the brightness levels.
I wouldn't go on about equal settings getting very similar results on all cameras, there's much to it than just that, or else every camera with the same settings would be producing comparable pictures despite the price, which is not true, that's why we choose our cameras very thoughtfully, or atleast I do.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.