On 2023-01-04 18:46, chop wrote:
> 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.

Relevant to your credibility.