Monitors slowly evolving
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Superzoom P&S's may have long "effective" focal lengths, but....
Next: What is the point of having 16 bit colour if a computer monitor can only display 8 bit colour? How do you edit 16 bit colour when you can only see 8 bit?
From: Me on 11 Jul 2010 00:32 On 11/07/2010 4:11 p.m., LOL! wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:53:37 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: > >> On 11/07/2010 3:36 p.m., LOL! wrote: >>> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:59:35 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 11/07/2010 2:15 p.m., RichA wrote: >>>>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml >>>>> >>>> Not saying that having 10 bit panels isn't an advance, but one of the >>>> problems with LCDs (vs CRT) is non-linear response on the LCD sub-pixels >>>> to the signal. That can be corrected to some degree by calibration, and >>>> so 10 bits probably with more precision (or can it - when>10 bit >>>> internal LUTs are already used in these monitors?), but: >>>> Some of the 8 bit IPS panels available at relatively low cost are pretty >>>> good these days - minimal or no visible banding of (8 bit) gradients. >>>> Eizo used to use Samsung-made VA matrix panels. Nothing inherently >>>> wrong with them, also used by NEC etc, except that VA panels typically >>>> show some "black crush" - poor definition of near black levels, >>>> especially at a very slight angle. The improvement that the LL notes >>>> "But the most obvious user observation would be that the lower zones of >>>> the image are depicted far more accurately in both color and gradation" >>>> is possibly (or even probably) attributable to comparing the new screen, >>>> (which happens to be 10 bit, but uses an in plane switching "IPS" panel) >>>> with another older Eizo (or other professional level monitor) which >>>> probably had a VA panel. >>> >>> 10-bit displays, 14-bit camera sensors, 16-32-bit editors .... >>> >>> And still I have yet to see even ONE of you put any of it to worthwhile >>> use. Color bit-depth is never going to automatically bestow any of you with >>> photographic skill and talent, no matter how much you think it might help. >>> Just what the world needs is a 32-bit depth image displayed on a 10-bit >>> depth monitor of yet another blurry and crappy image of your flea-bag of a >>> cat. >>> >> I don't have a cat, just a troll-killing mountain dog: >> http://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/20221633.jpg > > Damn, I should have said "yet another blurry and crappy image of your > flea-bag of a cat or dog." You definitely got the blurry part down pat. > Enjoying that shallow DOF are you? > Oh - forgot to say this was taken with a P&S. Shutter speed was way too slow to freeze motion blur. The old flea bag gets twitchy when she smells a troll.
From: LOL! on 11 Jul 2010 00:43 On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:32:06 +1200, Me <user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >On 11/07/2010 4:11 p.m., LOL! wrote: >> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:53:37 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On 11/07/2010 3:36 p.m., LOL! wrote: >>>> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:59:35 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 11/07/2010 2:15 p.m., RichA wrote: >>>>>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml >>>>>> >>>>> Not saying that having 10 bit panels isn't an advance, but one of the >>>>> problems with LCDs (vs CRT) is non-linear response on the LCD sub-pixels >>>>> to the signal. That can be corrected to some degree by calibration, and >>>>> so 10 bits probably with more precision (or can it - when>10 bit >>>>> internal LUTs are already used in these monitors?), but: >>>>> Some of the 8 bit IPS panels available at relatively low cost are pretty >>>>> good these days - minimal or no visible banding of (8 bit) gradients. >>>>> Eizo used to use Samsung-made VA matrix panels. Nothing inherently >>>>> wrong with them, also used by NEC etc, except that VA panels typically >>>>> show some "black crush" - poor definition of near black levels, >>>>> especially at a very slight angle. The improvement that the LL notes >>>>> "But the most obvious user observation would be that the lower zones of >>>>> the image are depicted far more accurately in both color and gradation" >>>>> is possibly (or even probably) attributable to comparing the new screen, >>>>> (which happens to be 10 bit, but uses an in plane switching "IPS" panel) >>>>> with another older Eizo (or other professional level monitor) which >>>>> probably had a VA panel. >>>> >>>> 10-bit displays, 14-bit camera sensors, 16-32-bit editors .... >>>> >>>> And still I have yet to see even ONE of you put any of it to worthwhile >>>> use. Color bit-depth is never going to automatically bestow any of you with >>>> photographic skill and talent, no matter how much you think it might help. >>>> Just what the world needs is a 32-bit depth image displayed on a 10-bit >>>> depth monitor of yet another blurry and crappy image of your flea-bag of a >>>> cat. >>>> >>> I don't have a cat, just a troll-killing mountain dog: >>> http://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/20221633.jpg >> >> Damn, I should have said "yet another blurry and crappy image of your >> flea-bag of a cat or dog." You definitely got the blurry part down pat. >> Enjoying that shallow DOF are you? >> >Oh - forgot to say this was taken with a P&S. Shutter speed was way too >slow to freeze motion blur. The old flea bag gets twitchy when she >smells a troll. In the mountains we call dogs that size, "Bear & Puma Snacks", and in the Everglades they are the favored size for "Gator Snacks". It was always so funny when some little yappy flea-bag mutt like that would start barking at the edge of a canal. Then moments later you hear its distraught owner yelling, "Oh NO! My Mr. Bonzo! HELP HELP! THAT GATOR IS SWALLOWING MY POOR LITTLE DOGGY, WHOLE!" I always wonder if they ever learn anything from it. LOL! Darwinism in action, I can never get enough of it. LOL!
From: LOL! on 11 Jul 2010 01:03 On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:32:06 +1200, Me <user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >Oh - forgot to say this was taken with a P&S. Shutter speed was way too >slow to freeze motion blur. Oh, I forgot to say, this was also shot with a superzoom compact camera during sunset. http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4081/4782164878_56285b02f4_b.jpg You're pretty lousy at knowing how to use any camera, aren't you. Thanks for proving that to the whole world. LOL!
From: Me on 11 Jul 2010 01:06 On 11/07/2010 4:43 p.m., LOL! wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:32:06 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: > >> On 11/07/2010 4:11 p.m., LOL! wrote: >>> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:53:37 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> On 11/07/2010 3:36 p.m., LOL! wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:59:35 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 11/07/2010 2:15 p.m., RichA wrote: >>>>>>> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/10bit.shtml >>>>>>> >>>>>> Not saying that having 10 bit panels isn't an advance, but one of the >>>>>> problems with LCDs (vs CRT) is non-linear response on the LCD sub-pixels >>>>>> to the signal. That can be corrected to some degree by calibration, and >>>>>> so 10 bits probably with more precision (or can it - when>10 bit >>>>>> internal LUTs are already used in these monitors?), but: >>>>>> Some of the 8 bit IPS panels available at relatively low cost are pretty >>>>>> good these days - minimal or no visible banding of (8 bit) gradients. >>>>>> Eizo used to use Samsung-made VA matrix panels. Nothing inherently >>>>>> wrong with them, also used by NEC etc, except that VA panels typically >>>>>> show some "black crush" - poor definition of near black levels, >>>>>> especially at a very slight angle. The improvement that the LL notes >>>>>> "But the most obvious user observation would be that the lower zones of >>>>>> the image are depicted far more accurately in both color and gradation" >>>>>> is possibly (or even probably) attributable to comparing the new screen, >>>>>> (which happens to be 10 bit, but uses an in plane switching "IPS" panel) >>>>>> with another older Eizo (or other professional level monitor) which >>>>>> probably had a VA panel. >>>>> >>>>> 10-bit displays, 14-bit camera sensors, 16-32-bit editors .... >>>>> >>>>> And still I have yet to see even ONE of you put any of it to worthwhile >>>>> use. Color bit-depth is never going to automatically bestow any of you with >>>>> photographic skill and talent, no matter how much you think it might help. >>>>> Just what the world needs is a 32-bit depth image displayed on a 10-bit >>>>> depth monitor of yet another blurry and crappy image of your flea-bag of a >>>>> cat. >>>>> >>>> I don't have a cat, just a troll-killing mountain dog: >>>> http://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/20221633.jpg >>> >>> Damn, I should have said "yet another blurry and crappy image of your >>> flea-bag of a cat or dog." You definitely got the blurry part down pat. >>> Enjoying that shallow DOF are you? >>> >> Oh - forgot to say this was taken with a P&S. Shutter speed was way too >> slow to freeze motion blur. The old flea bag gets twitchy when she >> smells a troll. > > In the mountains we call dogs that size, "Bear& Puma Snacks", and in the > Everglades they are the favored size for "Gator Snacks". These mutts were bred as ratters - very effective at it they are too, also good at catching rabbits, and despite their small size, hunting wild boars (easily trained to grab them by the balls and hold them while you stick them). You make the common mistake of confusing all small dogs with generally useless lap dogs.
From: Me on 11 Jul 2010 01:14
On 11/07/2010 5:03 p.m., LOL! wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:32:06 +1200, Me<user(a)domain.invalid> wrote: > >> Oh - forgot to say this was taken with a P&S. Shutter speed was way too >> slow to freeze motion blur. > > Oh, I forgot to say, this was also shot with a superzoom compact camera > during sunset. > > http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4081/4782164878_56285b02f4_b.jpg > > You're pretty lousy at knowing how to use any camera, aren't you. Thanks > for proving that to the whole world. > You got lucky. I posed my dog for the shot, sitting still, then pressed the shutter button. By the time the shutter went off, she'd stood up and had started wagging her tail. I suppose with your bird shot, it was much the same... |