Pondering Functionality

l v wrote:
> Wilba wrote:
>> l v wrote:
>>> Wilba wrote:
>>>> l v wrote:
>>>>> Wilba wrote:

>>> Exposure comp button is the same button as ISO, use the thumb wheel vs
>>> the finger wheel.
>>>
>>> Depending on the camera's mode (manual, shutter priority, aperture
>>> priority, etc) the finger wheel and thumb wheel make all of the
>>> necessary changes you are wanting do do with individual buttons.
>>>
>>> When in Av (aperture mode), the finger wheel adjusts the aperture
>>> setting and the thumb wheel adjusts the exposure comp - letting the
>>> camera calculate the shutter speed.
>>>
>>> When in Tv (shutter mode), the finger wheel adjusts the shutter speed
>>> and the thumb wheel adjusts the exposure comp - letting the camera
>>> calculate the aperture.
>>>
>>> When in P (program mode), the finger wheel shifts the exposure (both
>>> shutter and aperture) keeping the exposure the same.
>>>
>>> When in M (manual mode), the finger wheel adjusts the shutter speed and
>>> the thumb wheel adjusts the aperture.
>>>
>>> Tap the shutter without taking a photo and your settings are set.
>>
>> I don't dispute that a 40D and my fantasy camera can be set up to operate
>> the same way. The difference that makes a difference is how you get
>> there.
>>
>> The key thing in what you said is, "Depending on the camera's mode". I'm
>> suggesting in effect abandoning the conventional modes, and directly
>> controlling the four parameters independently at the user interface
>> level. The four parameters are only in any sense dependent when any one
>> or more are set to "auto", and the camera is given the responsibility for
>> chosing the parameter's value.
>>
>> I don't want to have to remember and think my way through all the
>> information contained in your preceding seven paragraphs. I want to
>> change the four parameters directly according to my whim.
>
> It's really quite easy. Nothing to remember and quite intuitive after a
> minute of using the camera. The finger wheel adjust the camera's mode.

That doesn't make sense. You originally said that modes are things like
aperture and shutter priority (using the mode dial, presumably), and the
finger wheel adjusts things like aperture and shutter speed according to the
mode. Now you're saying that the finger wheel adjusts the camera's mode.
Maybe you meant mode dial.

>> In many cases doing that won't be more or less efficient than achieving
>> the same effect with conventional modes. For instance, if you want to go
>> from aperture priority to shutter priority (without any change to ISO and
>> compensation), on a conventional camera you would turn the mode dial to
>> shutter priority and set the desired shutter speed, and on mine you would
>> set the aperture to auto and set the desired shutter speed. In both cases
>> you need two touches.
>
> It seems like it would be two touches of all of the buttons to get what
> the dial achieves in one quick rotate. It seems that if I want aperture,
> I need to push the aperture button and set it to "auto", then push the
> shutter button to set it. Having a mode dial, makes quick work of it, all
> can be done while looking through the view finder, and it remembers my
> last settings.

True, at least for the transitions between modes on the mode dial. If you
are also changing the way ISO is handled, you can't do that with mode dial
on a 40D (AFAIK).

It's an interesting question to ponder why the designers of advanced digital
cameras didn't use a mode dial with "aperture + ISO", "shutter + ISO", "P +
ISO", etc. modes.

>> I see current DSLR user interface design as being stuck on an
>> evolutionary path. With manual cameras, you set the shutter speed and
>> aperture to suit the fixed film sensitivity, and made exposure
>> compensations by fudging the shutter speed or aperture.
>
> I remember those days.
>
>> With built-in meters came the ability to have a mode in which the shutter
>> speed or aperture was chosen by the camera. Exposure compensation
>> could be achieved by fudging the film sensitivity.
>
> That is all the exp comp ring did on my camera.
>
>> With more electronic control came the ability to have the camera choose
>> either shutter speed, aperture, or both. It made sense to label each of
>> those options as a "mode".
>>
>> Now that sensitivity is as flexible as shutter speed or aperture, you
>> need to define and operate 2x2x2 = 8 distinct modes (manual or automatic
>> for three parameters). Rather than remember a three-dimensional matrix of
>> modes, and which user interface control does what in each mode, I want
>> to simply set the desired value for each of the four parameters, via
>> dedicated controls.
>
> That would be manual mode, right?

Full manual is one of the eight "modes" that you could get by setting (to
manual or auto), each of the three independent parameter.
 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality 

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Wilba wrote:
>> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>> Wilba wrote:

> In my mind, Compensation is a (fudge) factor applied to the
> metering result --- which is much more intuitive and logical,
> if you ask me.

Yep, you got it - offset = fudge factor in metering.

>>> The correct idea is to *learn* how to use your tool --- and once
>>> you understand that the finger directs and the thumb corrects,
>>> everything is absolutely clear.
>
>> Or you make a lateral jump in your thinking about how the tool is
>> operated, when ancient ideas don't work so well anymore.
>
> Ah, but you have neither proved that "ancient ideas don't
> work so well anymore" nor have you shown that your clunky
> interface is any better.

Correct. (As you have not proved the opposite.) I'm speculating on the
possibilities.

> Ancient does not equal bad, new does not equal good, as you well
> know.

Yes, as closed minds does not equal progress.

> Or would you stop that ancient "breathing", please, and use
> loudspeakers as your mouth replacement?

I'd like to turn your loudspeaker off sometimes.

Pondering =/= proof.

When the possibility of auto ISO came along, why do you think camera
designers didn't include "aperture priority + auto ISO", "shutter priority +
auto ISO", etc. modes on the mode dial?

>>> Aeh, how do you set your aperture to auto? Press a button?
>>> Or twirl the wheel from f/5.6 to f/44+ (or f/1.0 --- I have
>>> an f/1.4 lens on the camera by default)? The latter would be
>>> extraordinarily stupid, because it
>>> a) takes too long
>>> b) destroys pre-set settings
>
>> When it's time to solve that problem, you do it the best way you can
>> find.
>> If you were using a wheel, pressing it in to set to auto makes sense. But
>> remember, that's not the problem I'm pondering.
>
> Yes, you are pointedly ignoring all the pesky things that separate
> a nebulous day dream from a solid vision.

Not at all. My original post included user interface concepts to allow
exactly that. I'm just not committing to any particular implementation.
That's the hardest thing with functional modelling - you have to make it
real enough for people to get the idea, without actually designing the UI.

> Nothing wrong with day dreams, if you keep them to yourself, presenting
> a thought through proposal.

Eh? I have to keep my ideas to myself, AND present them through proposal?

>>>> Now that sensitivity is as flexible as shutter speed or aperture, you
>>>> need
>>>> to define and operate 2x2x2 = 8 distinct modes (manual or automatic for
>>>> three parameters).
>
>>> Please explain why one _needs_ to define and operate 8 different
>>> modes.
>
>> There are three independent parameter, each of which can be set to manual
>> or
>> auto - two degrees of freedom. 2^3 = 8.
>
> I didn't ask you to enumerate all possible combinations ---
> I can do that much math myself, thank you very much!
>
> Please answer the question.

One needs to define and operate 8 different modes because in this pondering,
there are 8 different combinations of auto and manual settings for the three
independent parameters involved in the physics of recording an image
(aperture, shutter speed, and sensitivity). Perhaps you're thinking that
"modes" in the previous sentence means "modes on the mode dial" - if you are
you're wrong.

If you're not getting the answer you want, please ask a different question.

 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality 

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Wilba wrote:
>> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>> Wilba wrote:

>>>> The functionality I described in the original post is best supported
>>>> by a user interface with one touch controls.
>>>
>>> Proof?
>>
>> Opinions don't need proof.
>
> By the duck test, you stated a fact, not voiced an opinion.

Try taking things in context. It might help your blood pressure.

> Facts (and opinions moonlighting as such!) need proof.

Sure. If I state any I'll be ready to back them up.
 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality 

Wilba <wilba RemoveThis @CUTTHISimago.com.au> wrote:
> l v wrote:

>> It's really quite easy. Nothing to remember and quite intuitive after a
>> minute of using the camera. The finger wheel adjust the camera's mode.

> That doesn't make sense.

It makes perfect sense.

> It's an interesting question to ponder why the designers of advanced digital
> cameras didn't use a mode dial with "aperture + ISO", "shutter + ISO", "P +
> ISO", etc. modes.

You'd only be bitching about not wanting to learn about all these
modes, so why bother?

-Wolfgang
 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality 

Wilba <wilba.RemoveThis@CUTTHISimago.com.au> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>> Wilba wrote:
>>> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>>> Wilba wrote:

> Try taking things in context. It might help your blood pressure.

Why should it rise *again*?

>> Facts (and opinions moonlighting as such!) need proof.

> Sure. If I state any I'll be ready to back them up.

Oh, and the following is a weather forecast, I take it:
| The functionality I described in the original post is best supported
| by a user interface with one touch controls.

-Wolfgang
 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality 

Wilba <wilba DeleteThis @CUTTHISimago.com.au> wrote:
> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>> Wilba wrote:
>>> Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
>>>> Wilba wrote:

>> Ah, but you have neither proved that "ancient ideas don't
>> work so well anymore" nor have you shown that your clunky
>> interface is any better.

> Correct. (As you have not proved the opposite.)

Please show me a sketch showing where the control wheels and
buttons should be and what they should do. Otherwise it's
kinda hard to show how your idea falls short.

(And anyway, it's the task of the new to prove it is better.)

>> Ancient does not equal bad, new does not equal good, as you well
>> know.

> Yes, as closed minds does not equal progress.

Open minds does not equal progress, either.

> When the possibility of auto ISO came along, why do you think camera
> designers didn't include "aperture priority + auto ISO", "shutter priority +
> auto ISO", etc. modes on the mode dial?

You'd be even more confused than you already are of all these
pesky modes!

If you want autoISO, switch it on, no need for another 2, 3 (M +
autoISO) or 4 (P + autoISO) settings on a dial. Too many
settings don't work for dials.

>>> When it's time to solve that problem, you do it the best way you can
>>> find.
>>> If you were using a wheel, pressing it in to set to auto makes sense. But
>>> remember, that's not the problem I'm pondering.

>> Yes, you are pointedly ignoring all the pesky things that separate
>> a nebulous day dream from a solid vision.

> Not at all. My original post included user interface concepts to allow
> exactly that.

I content nobody would be able to use that interface speedily,
hence it's in the "nebulous day dream" realm.

> I'm just not committing to any particular implementation.

You are unable to find any satisfactory implementation!

> That's the hardest thing with functional modelling - you have to make it
> real enough for people to get the idea, without actually designing the UI.

So design an UI based on your "funtional model"[1] and correct
any problems that crop up, then compare it to the existing UIs.
That's how it works.

>> Nothing wrong with day dreams, if you keep them to yourself, presenting
>> a thought through proposal.

> Eh? I have to keep my ideas to myself, AND present them through proposal?

You should keep your unripe, vague ideas to yourself.
Once you have a thought through, complete, sensible proposal,
offer it.

>>>> Please explain why one _needs_ to define and operate 8 different
>>>> modes.

>>> There are three independent parameter, each of which can be set to
>>> manual or auto - two degrees of freedom. 2^3 = 8.

>> Please answer the question.

> One needs to define and operate 8 different modes because in this pondering,
> there are 8 different combinations [...]

You don't _need_ modes merely because they are possible.[2]
Please answer the question.

> Perhaps you're thinking that
> "modes" in the previous sentence means "modes on the mode dial"

I don't.

-Wolfgang

[1] A non-existing, not functioning model ...

[2] This should be completely obvious!
 >> Stay informed about: Pondering Functionality