jrista

Guys, I think a lot of this could be turned into actual answers to the question. At some point we will need to clean all the comments here up.

A good test of this fact is trying to do astrophotography with a mirrorless camera that has an EVF. The EVF uses the sensor's sensitivity, and outside of the brightest stars, all you can really see is sensor noise. Use a DSLR with an optical viewfinder, however, and the sensitivity of your eye can see dozens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of stars with enough adjustment time.

Just a quick note...I'm not sure I'd equate sensor gain with eye sensitivity. Gain amplifies what little light the sensor collects, and in the average case the photodiode itself is only around 45% efficient (Q.E. of 45%, so only 45% of the light reaching the photodiode actually frees an electron). Out of the total amount of light reaching the sensor, 30-40% is filtered by the CFA, so the 45% Q.E. is 45% of 35%...~16% overall Q.E.! The rods in our eyes are sensitive to a SINGLE PHOTON, or ~100% Q.E...so the eye is a far more sensitive device in low light than an image sensor.

@MichaelClark Aye, sad indeed. I'll try to be around more often. Been slammed with work and it only seems to get busier. I am thankful that PhotoSE is pretty self sustaining.

I'll need some time to get that article moved over properly

when is the blog being shut down?

oh sure

@mattdm What did you need me to do, Matt?

hmm

Did someone summon me?

This is what I've been busy with lately. ;P

@AJHenderson Welcome. :)

Digital takes away all the repetitive, frustrating, and very expensive cruft in producing photography. :P

@EsaPaulasto indeed :)

Papers with OBAs have much higher white points and since they reflect light better, the dMax (where light is blocked by the inks) tends to be deeper.

Often the gamut in terms of mitdone extent covers sRGB, it's really the black and white points that change. Most matte papers can greatly affect black point (dMax), and white point tends to be lower to some degree.

If the sites you were looking at did their own tests off of the wrong kinds of paper, it is entirely possible the gamut they measured was less than sRGB.

There are only a few papers for both Canon and Epson printers that are actually capable of reproducing a wide gamut.

But, it really depends on the paper.

Epson has a range of UltraChrome inks, including the HDR version which is DEFINITELY wide gamut.

@AJHenderson Eh, it isn't exactly a simple "it's bigger" or "it's smaller". I am pretty sure that the PIXMA Pro has a gamut larger than sRGB, but smaller than AdobeRGB. That printer uses Lucia inks, which are pretty old now. There is also Lucia II and Lucia EX, which offer even wider gamuts and lower metamerism.

me too

?

it's just a bit too dark right now

add in two where the moon is just about to fully enter/exit totality

I think I'm going to get rid of the full unshadowed moons

I'm going to make another version of that as well

yeah

so I just removed those

There were two though that were basically identical to two others

If I took out the ones you recommend, it would become completely imbalanced...more on the right than on the left.

Well, I currently have it all balanced.

still a lot of moons in this comp, but I think it's less cluttered and tight

Tried to spread the spiral out a bit

yeah, trying to figure out how to rearrange the second one better

We should keep our source topics fresh, so I'll see what I can do to make sure that's the case.

I'll see what I can do about updating the duplicate question appropriately. I agree that we do not simply want to close new questions that may have more relevance in the current year and simply leave them closed and just pointing to an outdated answer.