On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 13:19:13 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-04 17:50, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 10:59:34 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-01-04 15:56, chop wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 10:41:54 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-01-04 15:11, chop wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 09:55:28 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2023-01-04 14:08, chop wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 08:34:33 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-04 13:25, chop wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 07:57:27 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-04 12:52, chop wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 07:22:04 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-04 12:12, chop wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2023 05:26:16 +1100, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-04 00:40, chop wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2023 10:02:32 +1100, Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 13:58, Your Name wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 21:41:50 +0000, Alan said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023-01-03 13:34, Your Name wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2022 8:54 PM, sms wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/22/2022 10:45 AM, badgolferman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Video explains the test and ranking method clearly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cameras are not named - photos have an id.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subjective (vote on best looking photo - not pixel
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> peeking).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQdjmGimh04&ab_channel=MarquesBrownlee
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there was a list of features on a smartphone I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could vote on, camera
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quality would be near the bottom. But that's just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me, I know many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are more concerned about selfies than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since smartphones have largely replaced
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumer-grade point and shoot cameras, camera
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quality is important for many users.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Picture quality is important. The ability to take a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> photo with so many pixels that you could professional
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> print the image as a full-size advertising billboard,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not really. The 'megapixel' count went way past the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usefulness range for the average person years ago and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is now simply a marketing gimmick to con people into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buying a new device they don't really need.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Utterly wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A high pixel count means you can get a useful image of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that is too far away to fill the frame.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Most phone and proper cameras already have some degree
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of physical zoom, especially these these days (the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software zoom is rather pointless sinc it only guesses
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what the missing pixels should be).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, utterly wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let us posit three phones.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One with a 640x480 and no optical zoom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One with 640x480 and a 2x optical zoom
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And one with a modern phone's 8064x6048 pixel sensor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with no optical zoom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And let us imagine that we are interested in taking a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> picture of something that only occupies a small 100x100
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are of the first phone's sensor.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the 2x optical zoom camera, you've now got an image
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with 200x200 pixels
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But on the modern phone's sensor, you get an image with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1,260x1,260 pixels.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just returned from four days in Yosemite. I was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ready to throw my wife's phone into the Merced River
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since her picture-taking was taking so much time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Those giant trees and those big rocks have changed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very little over the 40+ years we've been going
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there, though we have gotten much older.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's hard to believe that most people used to go a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole day without taking a picture of something.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "a whole day" ... I've never taken a personal photo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of anything in my entire life. The only times I've
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taken any photo would for someone else using their
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> camera / phone so they can be in the photo too.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What a limited life you've chosen.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. Simply no reason or need to take a photo of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you every memorable detail of your life is remembered
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with utter clarity...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not even possible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which would be my point.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yup.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We take photos of things in our lives BECAUSE we can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recall them with perfect clarity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But it is never going to be possible to take a photo or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> video of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EVERY MEMORABLE DETAIL OF YOUR LIFE, most obviously
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the very unexpected events like one of the kids
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> falling out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a tree with a ruler in her mouth like one of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> managed with one of my trees.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I never claimed it was, so...?
>>>>>>>>>>>> So your original was wrong with its EVERY.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Again: your failure is one of reading for comprehension.
>>>>>>>>>> We'll see...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I never claimed that anyone remembers every moment with
>>>>>>>>>>> perfect clarity.
>>>>>>>>>> But you did use the word EVERY when that isn't even possible.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting myself here:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 'So you every memorable detail of your life is remembered with
>>>>>>>>>>> utter clarity...
>>>>>>>>>> Not even possible given your EVERY.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...and you can share them with anyone you wish because you're
>>>>>>>>>>> also an accomplished artist in drawing and painting?'
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That is one sentence...
>>>>>>>>>> Which used the word EVERY.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...divided for effect...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...which ends in a QUESTION MARK?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I was asking the previous poster why he felt no need to EVER
>>>>>>>>>>> take a photo of what was happening in his life.
>>>>>>>>>> But stuffed up when you used the word EVERY.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's a rhetorical device, you ignoramus.
>>>>>>>> Bullshit, you bullshit artist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Posing an impossibility as a question.
>>>>>>>> It wasn't even a question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You didn't see the question mark?
>>>>>> There is no question mark in the original, you pathetic excuse for
>>>>>> a bullshit artist.
>>>>
>>>>> You're a liar or simply too stupid to understand what a question
>>>>> mark looks like.
>>>> We'll see...
>>>>
>>>>> Here is the precise text of the first post, precisely as it appeared:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'So you every memorable detail of your life is remembered with utter
>>>>> clarity...
>>>> So no question mark, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.
>>>
>>> So you snipped the last half of that sentence...
>> Nope, what I snipped was a new sentence, stupid.
>
> Are you admitting that "chop" is just another nym, then?

Irrelevant to your stupidity.