I have both, and I love the D4, but the Q8 gets different use: my D4 does 10 second 2800 lumen bursts on turbo (new high CRI leds), the Q8 does over 6000 for 3 minutes (=18 times longer), the D4 can run contuously tailstanding at 300/400 lumen, the Q8 at 2000.
Sound is same principle but not the same rule (explained on wikipedia), in case you wondered :student:
You can always ask a photographer, as flash photography requires a good understanding of when to move lights closer, and how much power you will need if you move them further away…
We were not talking about the inverse square law. We were talking about how the eyes, ears and brain perceive a doubling of either light or sound. It’s more of a psychological thing and not so much a mathematical equation.
In biology, laws of physics do apply, but it is a disordered interaction of so many physics equations that no result can ever be calculated. Biologists need a complete different tool set than the clear Newton’s equations, the ‘laws’ that biologists use are an extract of real life measurements that may or may not be applied to new situations. (see also ‘fuzzy logic’ )
In case of the sensitivity of the human eye you may look for a measured light level/human perception curve and that will certainly not be lineair or simple logarithmic.
strange. I would think it is cheaper to use a long bar to cut the heads from in the cnc. To cut it before the CNC would add human operating time but perhaps it will safe some material. But the separate heads had to be spanned in the CNC which produces more outcut material.
Everyone has a style of doing things, and virtually everyone will argue their way is best. As long as they can keep quality up and price down, how does it matter what gum they chew during the process?