I fumbled my images and now I don't know which photo was taken with which sensor. Which ones of these are taken with my CCD and which ones are taken with my CMOS?
>>4342857Jesus Christ there’s like three other threads about this schizo imaginary shit already FUCK OFF
Spoilers: Its all the same camera with different lightroom presets
>>4342857>Swedish godmachine>CCD or CMOS How can one thread be so based?
ugly wheels ugly wheels ugly wheels
>>4342864Soon my dear fag, soon[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1080Image Height2400Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage Created2024:07:28 21:00:33
it's very obvious it'd the same image man at least snap 4 different photos instead of editing the same file 4 times
>>4343037Look at the leaves more closely. They are not the exact same photo at least, but they do look like the same camera.
>>4343046you're right they moved. the reflections in the car are on the exact same spot so I guess it was 4 photos on a tripod
>>4342857This image is shit either way, no sensor type will make this crap better
>>4342858Schizo inaginary bullshit isn't an optionCCD or CMOS?
>>4342857BSI>CCD>front side CMOS.Also I suspect #3 is sony.
You need a rapidly moving picture to tell CCD from CMOS afaik because the only difference that can't be calibrated out is the rolling shutter.
>>4342864I like them, they're Volvo as fuck and kinda look like the 850's>>4342867Tacky, what did she do to you to deserve that?Now, steelies with original hubcaps would be aesthetic as fuck.
>>4343173>tackyMeshes are GOAT.
>>4342857I like the colors in #3 the most
>>4342857I like the colors in #1 the most
>>4343049i just read this and lmao i shot this handheld while squatting, i guess im just that good
>>4344054>you>goodpick none
>>4344058cope lmao
>>4344060>>4344058Nah he's right you fucking suck
>>4342857They all look like crap, so the sensor doesn't matter.
>>4344068i suck by being so good at handheld that people think im using a tripod? damn u got a weird idea of what sucking means>>4344069copout answer lol
>>4344070Learn grammar too, while at it, nigga.
>>4344072nah im esl and y'all r gonna have 2 deal with it
>>4342857>not using EXIFColor science could be anything depending on the camera.
>one week later>no one has a definitive answer yetI knew it, everyone here is full of shit and they attribute magical qualities to things they don't understand well like sensor technology.Based fe2fucker exposing the facade.
>>4345021If ur curious heres the cheat sheet.1. Leica M8 with IR cut filter2. Nikon D700 Jpeg with vivid profile3. Nikon D700 Jpeg with standard profile4. Leica M8 without IR cut filterFor anyone posting past this point, saying "i knew which was which" or any variation of such statements: no you didn't.
>>4345037i knew which was which[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4345037Shouldn't you have used the same brand at least? Sensor differences are more subtle than brand differences. Especially given you put a Leica in the mix, with its Kodak sensor.
>>4345037>Leica has the worst colorslollmao even
>>4345203>t. never held a Leica
>>4345047This is funny>>4345058This is cope
What is this meant to show? Detail your methodology so we know what we're looking at. Are these JPEGs SOOC with auto white balance? Did you manually white balance? If so, to what kelvin temp? Are they RAW? Are you processing them with the same settings? What curve are you using if so?Anyways, the main difference seems to be one of white balance.The D700 is a little cool. But yeah, M8 and D700, similar vintage cameras, both excellent. I don't think this is CCD vs CMOS as much as it is different image processing modalities.
>>4345238A lot of people claim CCD sensors have some sort of magic to them but when presented with a blind test nobody can actually tell the two apart precisely because of the reasons you mentioned.That's the point of this thread.
>>4342857If you wanted me to guess I'd say 2 was CCD, if that's the point of the thread
I knew #1 was ccd >>4343868
>>4345420>the point of this threadWhy did you have to make this thread when there were multiple others not at bump limit arguing the same thing? Cancerous behaviour.
>>4342857Conclusion: none of you fucks are taking photos if any importance, therefore it does not matter to anyone in the world what equipment you use to shoot your uninteresting shit.
>>4345486post an important photo theninb4 porn (sin) or news (ai generated)
Love how the moment i post the reveal all the assmads come out
color-science fags are all retarded, look at how they always said canon has the best colors and sony the worst and when someone did a blind test people vastly preferred sony colors and I think canon even came in last
>>4342857I love 3.
>>4347780Toneh is literally paid by sony.
>>4348326>hurr durr, doesn't countit was a blind test
>>4345037>Nikon D700Based. Do those new retro lookin' full frame Nikons have a similar sensor? I might have to pick one up.
>>4348656Not at all.
>>4348656The recent cameras and their Z-mount glass are superior. But there D700 is impressive value for money. The retro-styled ZF lacks buttons for a fast workflow, but is otherwise great.
