Ulysse Nardin

Marcus Hanke
[PuristSPro Moderator]
11519

• Show profile
• Show other posts

uh, Jeff ....

Thanks a lot for your valuable explanation. Apparently, the mass of words in my article effectivel buried the more vital information: exposure times were not 3 and 6 hours, but only 60 seconds, aka 1 minute in every case. The three and six hours were the time the watches staid in absolute darkness, since the goal of the experiment was to check the decrease of light emission from the watches.

Unfortunately, my digital camera does not offer a "bulb" setting, so 60 seconds are the maximum exposure time. In normal use, a change from 100 to 400 ASA setting (I assume the use of the old standard for film emulsion sensitiveness in modern digicams is more out of convenience than because of technical needs) would quadruple the exposure value (EV). However, my camera introduces a lot of noise ("grain" is not the correct term in this case) in this setting.

Yet I decided to use the 400 ASA setting out of curiosity when redoing the test. Yes, I am currently redoing it, with the watches being in the dark since two hours just now. There were specific reasons for this repeated ecperiment, which I will document in a separate post. A quick check of the first picture (at "0 minutes in darkness") did not disclose a substantial difference between the 100 ASA and the 400 ASA setting, neither in the brightness of the watches, nor in noise.

Regards,
Marcus

Site Info.