Concerning the Exposure Debate... (i'm gonna get flamed!)

[jbarrettash]

People like turtles.

Yes they do. But some don't. Nice counter

 

[ralphh]

MMM, the OP certainly has an interesting style!

Maybe i am being paranoid, but is everyone here this snarky and sarcastic? I apologize if you were being serious, but I really doubt it...

Yeah, pretty much. People either get used it to, leave, or get snarky and sarcastic and pick on the new guy in their turn too...

 

[jbarrettash]

MMM, the OP certainly has an interesting style!

Maybe i am being paranoid, but is everyone here this snarky and sarcastic? I apologize if you were being serious, but I really doubt it...

Yeah, pretty much. People either get used it to, leave, or get snarky and sarcastic and pick on the new guy in their turn too...

A shame. I bet there are a lot of smart, knowledgeable people here. Kind of a waste no? Well, I may be in the "leave" category. Not offended, just have better things to do and better folks to learn from...

 

[ralphh]

Maybe i am being paranoid, but is everyone here this snarky and sarcastic? I apologize if you were being serious, but I really doubt it...

Yeah, pretty much. People either get used it to, leave, or get snarky and sarcastic and pick on the new guy in their turn too...

A shame. I bet there are a lot of smart, knowledgeable people here. Kind of a waste no? Well, I may be in the "leave" category. Not offended, just have better things to do and better folks to learn from...

See, now you're getting it :lmao:

 

[ralphh]

On a side note, I quite enjoyed the story in your first post....

But I really can't agree that it'd be worth owning multiple different digital camera for different looks - I've owned nikons, canons and olympuses, and the RAW files all look pretty similar in terms of colour reproduction tbh.

As for being all for getting it right in camera and not in post. Well that can be a one-way street, which is why most people do it the other way around. If I want my image super grainy, I could shoot it at ISO 6400, but then if I change my mind later, i'm stuck. It's a destructive way of shooting, and it's guesswork - I can't accurately judge it on the back of the camera and the same amount of grain may not work equally well for every shot.

If I shoot it at ISO 100, I can add grain just the way I want it, at the strength I want it (or not) later.

I shoot to maximize my options later, not minimize them.

Having said that, I wouldn't shoot with the light all wrong assuming i could "fix it in post" because you can't, but you seem to be talking about getting quite specialized looks straight out of camera, which seems like a bad idea to me.

It's perhaps a little different in film - you do want a whole scene to look the same, but if I'm spending an hour or two with a model, I probably want to get a few different looks, not all with the same 'interesting' straight out of camera effect.

 

[jbarrettash]

On a side note, I quite enjoyed the story in your first post....

But I really can't agree that it'd be worth owning multiple different digital camera for different looks - I've owned nikons, canons and olympuses, and the RAW files all look pretty similar in terms of colour reproduction tbh.

As for being all for getting it right in camera and not in post. Well that can be a one-way street, which is why most people do it the other way around. If I want my image super grainy, I could shoot it at ISO 6400, but then if I change my mind later, i'm stuck. It's a destructive way of shooting, and it's guesswork - I can't accurately judge it on the back of the camera and the same amount of grain may not work equally well for every shot.

If I shoot it at ISO 100, I can add grain just the way I want it, at the strength I want it (or not) later.

I shoot to maximize my options later, not minimize them.

Having said that, I wouldn't shoot with the light all wrong assuming i could "fix it in post" because you can't, but you seem to be talking about getting quite specialized looks straight out of camera, which seems like a bad idea to me.

It's perhaps a little different in film - you do want a whole scene to look the same, but if I'm spending an hour or two with a model, I probably want to get a few different looks, not all with the same 'interesting' straight out of camera effect.

You enjoyed the story - thanks for saying so!

And I agree it's not worth the expense to own several cameras - that was, for different reasons, part of my point. The straight out of camera histogram-friendly exposed shots will look relatively similar - it's when you start pushing the cameras to their limits that the differences are more apparent. And while you CAN add grain in post, the point of the second story was that grain, or noise, is not the same from camera to camera, and in adding it in post the advantage, as you stated, is safety - the disadvantage is being stuck with the same basic artificially generated grain from shot to shot. Personally, I like putting the camera "through the wringer" to see what comes out the other side. And don't get me wrong, the vast majority of stuff I do is clean, full histogram mass audience friendly stuff. Maybe that's why I like to push things, when I can.

 

[ralphh]

Still don't agree - it depends on your software - with basic photoshop elements, yeah, but film simulation software has endlessly adjustable grains, with different textures, lump sizes, balance between shadow, midtone and highlight amounts, and all sorts.

I agree it can be fun to push the camera, but I'm too much of a control freak - it'd never be exactly as I wanted.

 

[Helen B]

Gain (-3db,-6db,-9db...) is an electronic amplification of the signal that adds voltage and raises the noise floor and hence lifts the entire signal. It's more like pushing than anything else.

No, it's the other way round, as one would expect.

Other way around, in what respect? And your tone... "as one would expect", wow... this site, i dunno...

Why so bitter, Helen? i mean, I am here to learn also, and there may be gaps in my understanding, so educate me. I'm open. But leave the bitterness at the door please. i don't deserve it and I think you know that.

And i'll post these to back up my understanding of the terms used. I am open to correction, and criticism, but not to ire and vitriol.

from this site The truth about video gain and how to use it properly - Production Apprentice



"Gain is an electronic amplification of the video signal. This means that the signal is boosted electronically, adding more voltage to the pixels on your imager (CCD or CMOS) causing them to get amplify their intensity and therefore brighten your image. This voltage increase is measured in decibels (dB) and is calculated using this equation:
Gain (in dB) = 20 x LOG(Voltage Out / Voltage In)
Now, I’ll be honest here – I’ve been doing this professionally since 1997 and I have never used this equation, so don’t freak out just yet. Allow me, or rather Bob Diaz, to put it into layman’s terms.
A +6dB Gain is equal to a 2x increase in the signal. A +12dB Gain is equal to 2 x 2 or 4x increase in the signal. A +18dB is a 2 x 2 x 2 or 8x increase in the signal. When we express Gain as dB, every +6dB increase represents another doubling the signal. Another way to think of it as F Stops.
+6dB = Adds 1 F Stop of light
+12dB = Adds 2 F Stops of light
+18dB = Adds 3 F Stops of light"

and this, from this site What Are dB, Noise Floor & Dynamic Range? : Noise & Vibration Measurement Blog

"Noise floor

Any practical measurement will be subject to some form of noise or unwanted signal. In acoustics this may be background noise or in electronics there are often things like thermal noise, radiated noise or any other interfering signals. In a data acquisition measurement system the system itself will actually add noise to the signals it is measuring. The general rule of thumb is: the more electronics in the system the more noise imposed by the system.

In data acquisition and signal processing the noise floor is a measure of the summation of all the noise sources and unwanted signals generated within the entire data acquisition and signal processing system.

The noise floor limits the smallest measurement that can be taken with certainty since any measured amplitude cannot on average be less than the noise floor.

In summary, the noise floor is the level of background noise in a signal, or the level of noise introduced by the system, below which the signal that’s being captured cannot be isolated from the noise."


So what have I gotten so backwards to merit your (2nd?) angry post?

You have answered your own question about what you got wrong. The reason I wrote 'as one would expect' is that one would expect that -3 dB of gain would lower the signal, not raise it. Is that not what you would expect? You answered a question about what negative gain meant, and got it the wrong way round. Shouldn't that be corrected? I have let most of your technical errors pass without remark. Life is too short.

 

[amolitor]

OP, I got you pegged as some kind of assistant who's been in the room a lot when other people did the stuff you're telling tales about. Just a theory, but it explains a lot. If it's true, it don't make you a bad person, everyone tends to inflate their roles a bit on the internets. It also doesn't make you wrong.

 

[jbarrettash]

No, it's the other way round, as one would expect.

Other way around, in what respect? And your tone... "as one would expect", wow... this site, i dunno...

Why so bitter, Helen? i mean, I am here to learn also, and there may be gaps in my understanding, so educate me. I'm open. But leave the bitterness at the door please. i don't deserve it and I think you know that.

And i'll post these to back up my understanding of the terms used. I am open to correction, and criticism, but not to ire and vitriol.

from this site The truth about video gain and how to use it properly - Production Apprentice



"Gain is an electronic amplification of the video signal. This means that the signal is boosted electronically, adding more voltage to the pixels on your imager (CCD or CMOS) causing them to get amplify their intensity and therefore brighten your image. This voltage increase is measured in decibels (dB) and is calculated using this equation:
Gain (in dB) = 20 x LOG(Voltage Out / Voltage In)
Now, I’ll be honest here – I’ve been doing this professionally since 1997 and I have never used this equation, so don’t freak out just yet. Allow me, or rather Bob Diaz, to put it into layman’s terms.
A +6dB Gain is equal to a 2x increase in the signal. A +12dB Gain is equal to 2 x 2 or 4x increase in the signal. A +18dB is a 2 x 2 x 2 or 8x increase in the signal. When we express Gain as dB, every +6dB increase represents another doubling the signal. Another way to think of it as F Stops.
+6dB = Adds 1 F Stop of light
+12dB = Adds 2 F Stops of light
+18dB = Adds 3 F Stops of light"

and this, from this site What Are dB, Noise Floor & Dynamic Range? : Noise & Vibration Measurement Blog

"Noise floor

Any practical measurement will be subject to some form of noise or unwanted signal. In acoustics this may be background noise or in electronics there are often things like thermal noise, radiated noise or any other interfering signals. In a data acquisition measurement system the system itself will actually add noise to the signals it is measuring. The general rule of thumb is: the more electronics in the system the more noise imposed by the system.

In data acquisition and signal processing the noise floor is a measure of the summation of all the noise sources and unwanted signals generated within the entire data acquisition and signal processing system.

The noise floor limits the smallest measurement that can be taken with certainty since any measured amplitude cannot on average be less than the noise floor.

In summary, the noise floor is the level of background noise in a signal, or the level of noise introduced by the system, below which the signal that’s being captured cannot be isolated from the noise."


So what have I gotten so backwards to merit your (2nd?) angry post?

You have answered your own question about what you got wrong. The reason I wrote 'as one would expect' is that one would expect that -3 dB of gain would lower the signal, not raise it. Is that not what you would expect? You answered a question about what negative gain meant, and got it the wrong way round. Shouldn't that be corrected? I have let most of your technical errors pass without remark. Life is too short.

No, it's the other way round, as one would expect.

Other way around, in what respect? And your tone... "as one would expect", wow... this site, i dunno...

Why so bitter, Helen? i mean, I am here to learn also, and there may be gaps in my understanding, so educate me. I'm open. But leave the bitterness at the door please. i don't deserve it and I think you know that.

And i'll post these to back up my understanding of the terms used. I am open to correction, and criticism, but not to ire and vitriol.

from this site The truth about video gain and how to use it properly - Production Apprentice



"Gain is an electronic amplification of the video signal. This means that the signal is boosted electronically, adding more voltage to the pixels on your imager (CCD or CMOS) causing them to get amplify their intensity and therefore brighten your image. This voltage increase is measured in decibels (dB) and is calculated using this equation:
Gain (in dB) = 20 x LOG(Voltage Out / Voltage In)
Now, I’ll be honest here – I’ve been doing this professionally since 1997 and I have never used this equation, so don’t freak out just yet. Allow me, or rather Bob Diaz, to put it into layman’s terms.
A +6dB Gain is equal to a 2x increase in the signal. A +12dB Gain is equal to 2 x 2 or 4x increase in the signal. A +18dB is a 2 x 2 x 2 or 8x increase in the signal. When we express Gain as dB, every +6dB increase represents another doubling the signal. Another way to think of it as F Stops.
+6dB = Adds 1 F Stop of light
+12dB = Adds 2 F Stops of light
+18dB = Adds 3 F Stops of light"

and this, from this site What Are dB, Noise Floor & Dynamic Range? : Noise & Vibration Measurement Blog

"Noise floor

Any practical measurement will be subject to some form of noise or unwanted signal. In acoustics this may be background noise or in electronics there are often things like thermal noise, radiated noise or any other interfering signals. In a data acquisition measurement system the system itself will actually add noise to the signals it is measuring. The general rule of thumb is: the more electronics in the system the more noise imposed by the system.

In data acquisition and signal processing the noise floor is a measure of the summation of all the noise sources and unwanted signals generated within the entire data acquisition and signal processing system.

The noise floor limits the smallest measurement that can be taken with certainty since any measured amplitude cannot on average be less than the noise floor.

In summary, the noise floor is the level of background noise in a signal, or the level of noise introduced by the system, below which the signal that’s being captured cannot be isolated from the noise."


So what have I gotten so backwards to merit your (2nd?) angry post?

You have answered your own question about what you got wrong. The reason I wrote 'as one would expect' is that one would expect that -3 dB of gain would lower the signal, not raise it. Is that not what you would expect? You answered a question about what negative gain meant, and got it the wrong way round. Shouldn't that be corrected? I have let most of your technical errors pass without remark. Life is too short.

I owe you an apology then. I wrongly thought that "as you'd expect" was a commentary directed toward me. And I was sloppy - I have no idea why I wrote minus in front of those numbers. A stupid mistake, but the theoretical explanation (once what I can only call a stupid typo is corrected - yes that i made several times ) is still correct. And please continue pointing out my technical errors. I am surprised you believe there are that many. You seem quite knowledgeable, but I think you are exaggerating. Maybe because my post accused you of anger - but you can see how in context what you wrote could be misconstrued.

 

[jbarrettash]

OP, I got you pegged as some kind of assistant who's been in the room a lot when other people did the stuff you're telling tales about. Just a theory, but it explains a lot. If it's true, it don't make you a bad person, everyone tends to inflate their roles a bit on the internets. It also doesn't make you wrong.

No, Amolitor, I am neither a bad person, nor a liar. :roll:

 

[pgriz]

Ok, jbarretash, why are you here?

 

[jbarrettash]

Ok, jbarretash, why are you here?

To learn and share. I seem to be a minority. Why do you ask? I have stated this in a few posts. But I am on the verge of leaving...

 

[pgriz]

Ok, jbarretash, why are you here?

To learn and share. I seem to be a minority. Why do you ask? I have stated this in a few posts. But I am on the verge of leaving...

I ask because we all are here to learn and share. And we do. I have shared some of my images, got feedback, saw other inspiring images, tried to replicate them, learned a lot doing this... I also enjoy reading the factual knowledge that many posters display, and the links they put up to give those of us who are interested, further information on the topic(s). I enjoy seeing the work (and progressive skill) of some people who started a few years ago, and have shown their progression over the years - that is both inspiring and intimidating at how good some of them have become. The people who leave, leave for three reasons: 1) their self-image is not affirmed by the members, 2) their skill level has risen to such a level that they rarely get meaningful critiques, or 3) they are not willing to put in the work needed in a group setting to exchange information.

Those who BS get called out. Those whose opinion of themselves is not supported by their work, get shot down. And as in any group, sometimes good people get into arguements that neither should have gotten into. Happens.

I can't tell you whether you should or should not stick around. But I can tell you that this place can give a lot of good learning advice, as long as you know how to play with the characters that are here. If you want to share, by all means, put your stuff up and let us see your work. After looking at it, we may decide you really do know your stuff, or we may decide you're a poseur. And if you wish to learn, there are simple ways of making that happen - state what you're trying to do, show an example of where you are, tell us what you'd like help with. You'll get a spectrum of responses, and some of them will actually be good ones.

 

[jbarrettash]

Ok, jbarretash, why are you here?

To learn and share. I seem to be a minority. Why do you ask? I have stated this in a few posts. But I am on the verge of leaving...

I ask because we all are here to learn and share. And we do. I have shared some of my images, got feedback, saw other inspiring images, tried to replicate them, learned a lot doing this... I also enjoy reading the factual knowledge that many posters display, and the links they put up to give those of us who are interested, further information on the topic(s). I enjoy seeing the work (and progressive skill) of some people who started a few years ago, and have shown their progression over the years - that is both inspiring and intimidating at how good some of them have become. The people who leave, leave for three reasons: 1) their self-image is not affirmed by the members, 2) their skill level has risen to such a level that they rarely get meaningful critiques, or 3) they are not willing to put in the work needed in a group setting to exchange information.

Those who BS get called out. Those whose opinion of themselves is not supported by their work, get shot down. And as in any group, sometimes good people get into arguements that neither should have gotten into. Happens.

I can't tell you whether you should or should not stick around. But I can tell you that this place can give a lot of good learning advice, as long as you know how to play with the characters that are here. If you want to share, by all means, put your stuff up and let us see your work. After looking at it, we may decide you really do know your stuff, or we may decide you're a poseur. And if you wish to learn, there are simple ways of making that happen - state what you're trying to do, show an example of where you are, tell us what you'd like help with. You'll get a spectrum of responses, and some of them will actually be good ones.

Thank you for that. I have thick enough skin, but after a while and enough insults, insinuations and accusations of lying, you kinda start saying "what's the point?". Which is maybe the 4th reason people leave? This would be a far better place were it friendlier, no?

Those who BS should get called out, but I hope you aren't lumping me in that lot. I have made a few clerical and technical errors here, corrected them and even apologized humbly, but have been met with derision, condescension and, I guess, loathing... (though it's hard to tell exact tone from a string of words on a screen.). I assure you I am competent, knowledgeable, passionate, curious, hionest and ready to learn more, but no one is obligated to believe me. I started this thread because I thought it an interesting topic for debate, but also because I saw a new guy getting flamed and thought I'd redirect the attention toward myself. Looks like I got what I asked for!

I came here because I don't have that much experience printing on a professional inkjet printer, am trying to solidify a better workflow now that I finally (after wanting one for years!) bought an epson 3880. All i can tell you is that I do have a lot to contribute myself, but appreciate having errors pointed out so I may correct them, but I will not be the guy to stick around and heap sarcasm on newbies once my turn is up. That is childish.