Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: The polariceing on the cake
    From: Bill B
    Date: 2006 Jan 27, 21:48 -0500

    Peter Wrote:
    
    > My understanding is that there is nothing imprecise about f/ stops; they need
    > to be and are quite precise in order to function, ie; to permit an accurate
    > exposure. Just try telling Schneider or Rodenstock or any other lens maker
    > that its finely calculated then engraved f/stops are only ?about? right and I
    > suspect you would be met with withering scorn.
    
    The above statement regarding f-stops is *mostly* true these days.  Ansel
    Adams, in book # 1, "The Camera" speaks to that. (Revised 1980.)  First, by
    definition, the "relative" aperture of a lens, as George correctly stated,
    is focal length over diameter (of lens opening).
    
    To quote Ansel, "The f-stop relates exposure to the effective diameter of
    the lens, but disregards other factors, primarily the efficiency of the lens
    in its actual transmission of light.  Since lenses of many elements are less
    efficient than those of few elements--because of reflection of light at each
    surface and the optical density of the glasses--attempts have been made to
    develop the actual transmission of a lens.  A scale of "t-stops" has
    sometimes been been substituted for f-stops to indicate light transmission.
    These values are seldom seen today, except in some lenses for
    cinematography, primarily because the efficiency of lenses has been greatly
    increased by lens coating techniques.  The t-stop values, while fine for
    determining exposure, also distort other mathematical values that relate
    directly to the true f-stop, such as depth of field and hyperfocal
    distance."
    
    Really, given the modern lens, even if t-stops were treated as f-stops on
    the barrel, the depth of field and hyperfocal distance are also on the
    barrel of small and medium format lenses, so big deal.  Who do we know that
    calculates exposure by using the square root of the aperture related to foot
    candles today?  This is in anticipation of (IMHO)) a valid argument; they
    can make the hole in the adjustable aperture any size they want as long as
    it passes through the prescribed amount of light. Bingo, perhaps a t-stop in
    f-stop clothing?
    
    If you are serious about your photography, I would wager you have lighted up
    a wall or some such thing, used film from the same batch and photographed it
    (bracketing exposures) with the same body and all your lenses to determine
    the actual light transmission of each lens, as well as its contrast.
    
    As this is way off topic, I replied to George off list, and would suggest if
    we wish to continue, we do the same.  My sphere of ignorance is not limited
    to navigation.
    
    > If the bear is no longer required he may retreat to the woods for a nice
    > peaceful sleep
    
    Not so fast my furry friend. I feel you, George and I have all gotten to
    walk a mile in the bear costume in this discussion if we equate honest
    disagreement with sticks and stones ;-)  The lower lower limit of my stacked
    guess was inline with measured.  Objectively however, my guess was based on
    doubling.  I was wrong.  George guessed 10% loss when it was 35-40%.  George
    was, in practice, wrong.  I would be hard pressed to say he or I won a
    "bet."  As a sports analogy, I would say George's team won the game but he
    lost the bet on the points spread.
    
    Since it is a discussion forum, not a scored debate society, I feel most
    interested parties came away with a better understanding of polarization
    than they came in with.  The goal.  It is understandable that your fur was
    initially raised by George's criticism of you percentages, and a reminder
    that we *all* may need to try practicing a bit more diplomacy--telling the
    other fellow to go to h-ll in such a way as he will look forward to the
    trip.  Or, in  words of Will Rogers, "Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice
    doggie" until you can find a rock."
    
    Enough stonings for one day ;-)
    
    Pax vobiscum
    
    Bill
    
    
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site