除了噗... 和下面的蠢對話... 似乎沒有回答我的問題？
----------------------------
噗

我回答啦

只是有人蠢得看不懂

我這裡都沒提到『輸出端』啊

只是談『中介檔』的問題而已

>我是不明白，如果你很明白，可否說一下，你測出來後要幹嘛？

我要完整的產品特性數據.如ISO, 這只是其中一項Measure.
沒數據的攝影,比較難控制.

Zone system 其實是很有系统的找出及應用這些數據.況且不是停在底片.是包括了洗照片的,所以不用"拿你的底片出來展覽算了..."
出

除了CHRIS之前說等於ZS的錯誤外（而這錯誤其實前面他早就承認了），我也從沒說過RAW=ZS這種話... 一直以來，我都是在討論如和透過RAW檔的特性，去運用之前ZS所學到的東西，你除了抓住那句語病外，說出了哪些RAW的知識呢？就算你在ZS多專業，不擅長用RAW的人，如何知道別人處理RAW的流程沒有用ZS的觀念呢？

如果你不擅長用RAW，那你救不要用你的水準來評斷那些擅長用RAW的人...既然知道自己笨，那不如請你先學好RAW檔再來評斷別人的觀念正確與否...

我笨得不知誰人何時早就承認錯誤了.

>頭腦硬的人???
原來承認錯誤了之後,還是可以不斷重覆認錯前的論調的.

打個岔 請教一下
為什麼輸入或輸出DR(動態範圍)可以用bit表示?
一般不都是以dB..

雖然kodak 1997 已退出
但這裡有1995的規範 參考了解原理就好
對於影像
先寬心包容
時間會作該作的處置
晚安

以臺灣的處境與條件
數位內容是一定要把握的
但決不是忘了傳統
有機有金時
就要讓傳統放光芒
不然中國日本韓國真的也已經很強悍了
純粹說說個人想法 別太認真...

打個岔 請教一下
為什麼輸入或輸出DR(動態範圍)可以用bit表示?
一般不都是以dB..
-----------------------------
ＤＲ=log (Dmax/Dmin) :)

嚴格來講，CHRIS所指的BIT是色階（Level），不是DR

RAW (linear) and converted (gamma = 2.2) levels are shown in Table 1 for eleven zones of decreasing luminance, numbered 1 through 11. Columns 2-6 are for RAW (unconverted) data. The brightest Normalized level in each zone, 1/2n-1 = {1, 0.5, 0.35, ...} is shown in column 2 and the fraction of available levels, 1/2n = {0.5, 0.25, 0.125, ...} is shown in column 3. The total number of levels for RAW files from 10, 12, and 14-bit A-to-D converters is shown in the columns 4-6. Most current digital SLRs have 12-bit A-to-D converters. The rightmost five columns are for color spaces with gamma = 2.2. The rightmost two columns show the number of levels in each zone for 8 and 16-bit depths, representative of 24 and 48-bit color files.

In a RAW, i.e., linear file, the pixel level is proportional to light intensity. An exposure change of one zone or f-stop involves halving or doubling the pixel level. Therefore, half the pixel levels are in the top (brightest) zone, a quarter are in the second zone, a fourth are in the third zone, etc. A linear file with a bit depth of 8 (256 discrete levels) would contain 128 levels in the top zone, 64 levels in the second, and so on. The top zone would have far more levels than the eye can distinguish, while the lower zones would have relatively few levels-- only 8 and 4 in zones 5 and 6, respectively. "Banding" would be visible in shadows. If much editing were applied to the image-- if shadow areas had to be lightened (dodged) or increased in contrast, the banding could become severe. In a color space with gamma = 2.2, the distribution of levels is much more uniform: there are 69 levels in zone 1 (close to Weber-Fechner's magic number), 50 in zone 2, and so on. Zone 6 would still have 14 levels. Banding is invisible unless considerable editing is applied. Gamma = 2.2 may well be the ideal value for files with a bit depth of 8 (8-bit B&W and 24-bit color).


http://www.normankoren.com/digital_tonality.html#Gamma_contrast

Dynamic Range and Bit-Depth
Converting a high-quality scan into an 8-bit linear (gamma=1.0) space value would truncate the dynamic range, since it is physically impossible to store more than DMax 2.4 in an 8-bit integer. However after using gamma encoding it is theoretically possible to store a dynamic range of (log(255^2.2))=5.30. In reality the "sparse" data in the lower extreme of any 8-bit non-linear (gamma encoded) space considerably limits it's useful range.





http://www.photo.net/learn/drange/

謝kkuro 大的資料.很好的資料.很少看關於Motion, Video 或Television 的.
我知是中文差或是不了解臺灣背景文化,看不懂393,395及396.

謝powerslide 大的資料,很能深入淺出,温故知新.