Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Exposure Simulator

andersenimages.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 83 posts

Re: Exposure Simulator

#31

Post by mmh0000 »

semiquaver wrote: post #28

I know that modern systems like aperture priority or full auto make things easier, but I maintain that the many photos I took with a fully manual film camera (Canon AE-1) were simply better than those taken with any subsequent DSLR. The simple act of calibrating the shutter speed, aperture size, and manual focus before and during shooting helps you slow down and think about composition and framing, making the end res…

Don't worry! We're moving away from automatic cameras, too. Soon, you'll just use ChatGPT to generate your vacation images on demand.

I'm being a little hyperbolic, but it really seems like, for a non-insignificant portion of the population, that will be true.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#32

Post by [deleted] »

Filligree wrote: post #18
sneela wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's what exactly confused me :) With my mnemonic, I say low *number = blur I should have been more specific

The aperture size is usually described as e.g. f/32, where f is a camera-specific constant. Denominator, not numerator. That's why larger number = smaller aperture.

[deleted]

Re: Exposure Simulator

#33

Post by blacklion »

mmh0000 wrote: post #31
semiquaver wrote: post #28

I know that modern systems like aperture priority or full auto make things easier, but I maintain that the many photos I took with a fully manual film camera (Canon AE-1) were simply better than those taken with any subsequent DSLR. The simple act of calibrating the shutter speed, aperture size, and manual focus before and during shooting helps you slow down and think about composition and framing, making the end res…

Don't worry! We're moving away from automatic cameras, too. Soon, you'll just use ChatGPT to generate your vacation images on demand. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but it really seems like, for a non-insignificant portion of the population, that will be true.

Friend of mine suggested "vacation camera" concept when Panoramio was established (around 2006): box with compass, GPS and Internet connection. You point it to the sight, press button, it downloads photos of this sight. If you have premium subscription, it downloads professional photos with professional post-processing.

Inserting user's mates was a problem in 2006.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#34

Post by moon2 »

semiquaver wrote: post #28

I know that modern systems like aperture priority or full auto make things easier, but I maintain that the many photos I took with a fully manual film camera (Canon AE-1) were simply better than those taken with any subsequent DSLR. The simple act of calibrating the shutter speed, aperture size, and manual focus before and during shooting helps you slow down and think about composition and framing, making the end res…

That's why I love fiddling with analog cameras for a bit, or even experimenting with old lens on newer DSLRs. I have a Canon Rebel from 2011 and sometimes love to use my soviet Zenit Helios 44M lens in it. I do have the Zenit which came with this lens, but I have yet to develop its film.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#35

Post by moon2 »

PetitPrince wrote: post #22

For me it's missing something to illustrate the relationship between shutter speed and motion blur. If the subject was a running fan instead of of lightbulb that would have been ideal.

From the website:

If I ever find a good moving prop like a small fan, maybe I'll also re-shoot new previews to demonstrate how shutter speed affects moving objects.

Now, I'm just not sure how would one simulate a running fan with a picture. While for a static image you can have separated foreground and background and then apply effects for simulation (I know iPhone HEIC images have this property), for moving images you have to simulate the blur and the stillness, which is probably more difficult in terms of coding.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#36

Post by sixothree »

mmh0000 wrote: post #31
semiquaver wrote: post #28

I know that modern systems like aperture priority or full auto make things easier, but I maintain that the many photos I took with a fully manual film camera (Canon AE-1) were simply better than those taken with any subsequent DSLR. The simple act of calibrating the shutter speed, aperture size, and manual focus before and during shooting helps you slow down and think about composition and framing, making the end res…

Don't worry! We're moving away from automatic cameras, too. Soon, you'll just use ChatGPT to generate your vacation images on demand. I'm being a little hyperbolic, but it really seems like, for a non-insignificant portion of the population, that will be true.

The rate at which people are currently posting AI enhanced or modified images of themselves is a bit surprising to me. Apparently people very much like wearing different outfits or travelling to new places without actually having to put them on or actually leave the house.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#37

Post by moon2 »

This is honestly the best and most simple way to learn photography, at least something basic that is still very hard to grasp sometimes. I know photography is not just about the photometer, and about depth of field, but this simple simulator helps to learn about these relationships between aperture size, shutter speed and ISO which always bugged me (sometimes my shots were bad and sometimes great).

Re: Exposure Simulator

#38

Post by agos »

this is a cool idea, but not very well executed. it appears it just overlays white on top of anything? exposure does not work this way

Re: Exposure Simulator

#39

Post by andyfilms1 »

moon2 wrote: post #35
PetitPrince wrote: post #22

For me it's missing something to illustrate the relationship between shutter speed and motion blur. If the subject was a running fan instead of of lightbulb that would have been ideal.

From the website: If I ever find a good moving prop like a small fan, maybe I'll also re-shoot new previews to demonstrate how shutter speed affects moving objects. Now, I'm just not sure how would one simulate a running fan with a picture. While for a static image you can have separated foreground and background and then apply effects for simulation (I know iPhone HEIC images have this property), for moving images y…

I love the idea that this guy was easily able to scrounge up a florescent bulb in a beer coozie, but a desk fan is somehow unobtainable.

Re: Exposure Simulator

#40

Post by kqr »

einr wrote: post #12
arghwhat wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the disclaimer that I am comparing to the memory of some entry-level cameras, I would still say that it's way too noisy. Even on old, entry-level APS-C cameras, ISO1600 is normally very usable. What is rendered here at ISO1600 feels more like the "get the picture at any cost" levels of ISO, which on those limited cameras would be something like ISO6400+. Heck, the original pictures (there is one for each apertur…

Noise depends a lot on the actual amount of light hitting the sensor per unit of time, which is not really a part of the simulation here. ISO 1600 has been quite usable in daylight for a very long time; at night it's a somewhat different story. The amount and appearance of noise also heavily depends on whether you're looking at a RAW image before noise processing or a cooked JPEG. Noise reduction is really good these…

The kind of noise also makes a huge difference. Chroma noise looks like ugly splotches of colour, whereas luma noise can add positively to the character of the image. Fortunately humans are less sensitive to chroma resolution so denoising can be done more aggressively in the ab channels of Lab space.

Yes, this simulation exaggerates a lot. Either that, or contains a tiny crop of a larger image.

Post reply on HN