text:
Talk:Zone System

Moved "Zone System" content to this "Zone system" page...
... according to my understanding of how the articles should be named, then redirected the former to the latter. --NathanHawking 23:38, 2004 Sep 28 (UTC)
 * Zone System is a proper name and should therefore be capitalized. Maikel 00:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

My rewrite of the Zone system
I revised this page to improve flow and to use more accurate terms. True, terms like "B&W" and "dynamic range" and "previsualization" are often used, and were even used by Adams himself.

But "dynamic range," for example, is not a useful or even accurate term. "Range" itself has the connotation of "dynamic," and the dynamics do not "range" in any event. What "ranges" for photographers is the luminosity of a scene and the sensitivity of materials.

I also removed the external link. While it did give information about the zone system, it was clearly also a commercial website. My understanding is that external references should be only to noncommercial materials.

In addition, I uncapitalized "Zone System" because, while many (though hardly all) choose to capitalize it as a proper name, to the best of my recollection Adams generally used it less formally. I believe he would have felt the incessant capitalization of the term pretentious, but if anyone has any of his old zone system manuals perhaps they can drop a note to my talk page. --NathanHawking 00:31, 2004 Sep 29 (UTC)

Dynamic range
I think "dynamic range" is better than "sensitivity range" for this article. "Dynamic range" is in the vernacular of photography; the phrase has a meaning that is slightly different than the sum of its elements. To see what I mean, do a google search for both terms (with the quotes).

It has been twenty years since I've read Ansel Adams' book The Negative, and I don't remember the term he used- but I will try to find it and check.

Duk 21:30, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the feedback. True, "dynamic range" is in the vernacular in many fields, including photography. The problem is that it's a redundant term. In fact, "dynamic range" says nothing more than "range" alone says. It's OK if people want to use it idiomatically, and easily understood if used in a specific context. But in photography it's used in a half-dozen ways. If I say "the dynamic range of film," am I referring to the range its sensitivity to light, or to the range of its opacity to transmitted light?

 * In a forthcoming contribution to the zone system article, I plan to list the variables photographers must recognize, including: luminosity range of the scene, sensitivity range of film and paper, opacity range of film, and reflectance range of paper. At various times these have all been called "dynamic range." This use of the term is worth noting in passing, but why not be specific in an encyclopedia article? --NathanHawking 22:09, 2004 Oct 2 (UTC)

 * Dynamic range means something very specific in music, where it refers to range in volume.
 * --Dfeuer 05:27, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dynamic range is used often in audio, and I suspect that will influence the google hit counts. (Not that they are necessarily right.) I suspect that Dynamic range is used more in digital photography, and less in analog (film) photography, partly because of fundamental physics differences. I don't know any reason to argue one way or the other for film photography, the subject here. Gah4 (talk) 03:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Frederick Scott Archer
This page and the Ansel Adams page each contain a reference to Archer as the co-inventor of the Zone System (although the pages refer to him as 'Fred Archer,' the Adams page links to Frederick Scott Archer). Curiously the Frederick Scott Archer describes his contributions to photography, but does not refer to the Zone System at all. While the Zone page credits Archer with the co-invention, Archer died in 1857, 83 years before the system was devised?

Can someone reconcile these differences? Perhaps the Adams link goes to the wrong Fred Archer, and that Archer deserves the creation of his own page. SteveHopson 00:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Ansel Adams was a master of the black arts. I believe he dug up and re-animated the corpse of Frederick Scott Archer and asked its advice... (*cough*)
 * As far as I can (seriously) tell, they are two different people. Note that the 19th century guy wasn't "Mr. Archer"; his surname was "Scott Archer".
 * I have looked into this, and have added the information to a newly-created Fred Archer (photographer) article. Perhaps others can add more information to this stub. Fourohfour 16:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks, the article is a good start. SteveHopson 16:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Slide film
A distinction needs to be made between slide and digital. You simply cannot underexpose for slide film, in the same degree as digital...with this in mind I have removed the reference to slide being similar to digital. I feel that it is not.

Slide needs correct exposure, significant underexposure will ruin a photo. Limits of dynamic range over the lattitude of slide are countered best with a ND graduated filter...

I also feel that in certain parts, ie Dynamic range, should also be linked and explained as similar to latitude. Possible that the style is somewhat overbearing and not simple enough to get the message through —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barryfitzgerald (talk • contribs)

 * I'm not sure I agree with you about underexposing slide film. Just how much underexposure are you referring to? I must admit I'm still quite new to slide film. I slightly overexposed my first roll of Provia because I had become accustomed to using the light meter in my camera for print film. The next few rolls I made sure to purposefully underexpose by a half or a full stop (according to the meter), and the results were much better. Scanning them with a Coolscan V, I found that a lot of detail can be hidden in the dark areas. Using the curves tool in Cinepaint (derived from The GIMP), I could really make quite a lot of hidden detail appear out of the dark.
 * Still, the point should be made that you expose print film for the shadows and expose slide/digital for the highlights. Print film can handle being overexposed (sometimes quite a lot) without losing detail in the highlights, whereas slide and digital can't. Slide film goes transparent and digital maxes out. --Imroy 12:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

 * This is one area where Cinepaint (i.e. the 16-bit Film Gimp) should score over the ordinary Gimp, which only has 8-bits. Highlight and shadow detail are compressed into narrow ranges at the ends of the scale, and "stretching" this will exaggerate and (possibly) show up quantisation (i.e. loss of graduation/information). Fourohfour 17:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The terms "overexposed" and "underexposed" are often misused as they are in a paragraph above. A photographer never over or under-exposes intentionally because those terms indicate incorrect exposure - an error. If someone increases exposure to produce a correct exposure or to produce a special effect (also a "correct" exposure), they should say that they have increased exposure, not overexposed the image. After all, the image is not overexposed if that's how the photographer wanted it. (If you find that a cake you baked is not done enough, you would not over-cook the next one; you would increase the oven temperature or increase the bake time. The result should be a properly cooked cake, not an over-cooked one.)  However, if a photographer is describing an incorrect exposure,  then the terms underexposed and overexposure are correct. The statement in the above paragraph which says, "The next few rolls [SIC} I made sure to purposefully underexpose by a half or full stop... and the results are much better" is an example of the improper usage of the term "underexpose." It should have said, "For the next few rolls, I made sure to purposefully REDUCE exposure..." The decrease in exposure was used to compensate for a variable with the purpose of correcting bad exposures. If he had actually underexposed the next few rolls, they would not be exposed correctly by definition and they would have been worse than the original rolls. In this case, the photographer originally had an overexposure so he reduced exposure to obtain correct exposures. He did not underexpose at all when he compensated. Misuse of those terms is not conducive to a clear understanding of the principles of exposure. This is especially important in a discussion of the Zone System which depends greatly on such a clear understanding as well as precise and accurate usage of the terminology involved. There is enough confusion about the Zone System without adding to it. - [Tom Johnston]

I (just slightly) disagree. Maybe you are right for cake, but for brownies, some like them chewy, and some cake-like, and the directions often give times for both. You could call one overcooked, or undercooked, if you like the other. Correct exposure, like cooking, is more an art than a science. In photography, one is sometimes compensating for the exposure meter being fooled, or otherwise not reading properly, in which case one is not over or underexposing, as Tom Johnston notes. Also, if one intentionally exposes for shadows or highlights through appropriate metering, again one is not over or underexposing. But as with the brownies, one might intentionally change the exposure. Pulling and pushing are systems for intentionally over or underexposing, and changing development appropriately. You might argue over those not being over/under exposing. In the case of Tri-X, Kodak recommends no development time change for EI 800. That is, you are allowed to underexpose one stop! Gah4 (talk) 04:04, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Fred Archer's role
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be that much information out there about Fred Archer's part in the creation of the zone system. Fred Archer is definitely *not* Frederick Scott Archer; the latter died in the 1850s. I came across one comment that was only available via the Google cache. It suggested that Fred Archer was working at a college in Los Angeles and published a series of articles in U.S. Camera during the late 1930s, these forming the basis of the zone system.

I added it to the Fred Archer article. Perhaps it should go here too? Fourohfour 16:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There is errant information in this article
According to Ansel Adams' Basic Photography series book 'The Negative' in chapter four, there are eleven zones in the Zone System. This among other facts that I edited on this article in the past are incorrect information. However those who wrote this article will do no research on my edits and simply restore the faulty information. Someone wanting to use wikipedia as a source for learning the Zone System will fail because of the lack of research that goes into the articles that appear on the database. I cannot take part further in misinformation for the sake of self input. Sorry. -- 13:27, 2007 Apr 3 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I have The Negative here with me at the moment, borrowed from the local library. There are definitely eleven zones - 0 through to X. So not only will the text have to be changed, but the graphics too. I'll see what I can do. --Imroy 16:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Ok, I've gone and made the necessary changes. I made my own gradient graphics in The GIMP and uploaded them. I replaced three images in the article with tables since solid colour boxes can be easily accomplished by setting background colours. The downside is that the tables are not the same size as the images and look a little disjointed. Perhaps they should all be replaced by SVG diagrams. I also fixed up the text to refer to eleven zones, not ten, and some other references to certain zones and ranges. I think it's correct now. --Imroy 10:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Several things still don't seem quite right:

 * 1) The introduction seems to imply that the purpose of the Zone System was literal reproduction, which was not the case at all, especially in Adams's own photography.  He always has made this quite clear, for example, on pages 21–25 of The Negative (1948 edition) and Chapter 1 of The Negative (1981 edition).
 * 2) The use of dynamic range with regard to photographic paper is unusual, to say the least (although, amazingly, it does appear on the back cover of Todd and Zakia's Photographic Sensitometry, 2nd ed., 1974).  More important, perhaps, it that is difficult to see the relevance to the Zone System, at least at the level of a WP article.  The negative development is adjusted so that density roughly matches the exposure range of the paper; this practice long predated the Zone System, though perhaps it wasn't quite as systematic.  More relevant might be the reflectance range of a print, which is roughly 100:1 for ferrotyped glossy paper and much less for matte.  Even so, this also really is peripheral.
 * 3) The development of the Zone System had little to due with the difference between the luminance range of a typical scene and the reflectance range of a print.  The issue was the sometimes haphazard relation between the luminances of individual scene elements and their representations in the print (allowing for compression of the scale, of course) when exposure was determined with integrated-luminance measurements ("averaging meters").  When the luminance distribution matched that of a "typical" outdoor scene, results usually were satisfactory, but in other situations (a black horse or a white horse filling the frame), results were quite unsatisfactory.  Adams explains this quite well on pages 28–37 of The Negative (1981 edition).
 * 4) Normal development doesn't necessarily make the negative contrast match that of the original scene.  Rather, it adjusts the contrast so that the negative will print satisfactorily on the photographer's "normal" paper (usually grade 2 or 3).  Here, Fred Picker's approach was more systematic than Adams's, basing development on Zone VIII rather than Zone V.
 * 5) I think stating that "As of 2007 most digital SLRs ... have a dynamic range approaching 10 stops" is a bit of a stretch, even with the "citation needed" tag.

There also are a couple of minor points:

 * Adams may originally have used "previsualization", but he used "visualization" at least since the 1948 edition of The Negative.
 * Adams treated Zone System as a proper noun; I think WP should defer to Adams on the issue, as do most other texts. JeffConrad 07:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to address some of these issues. There's a bit of work involved, so it may take a couple of days. JeffConrad 08:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

JPEG is eight bit, but most DSLR cameras can store in RAW or TIFF form with 12 bits. But even so, it seems wrong to call it 10 stops. On the low end, you run into thermal (electrical) noise, even if there are enough bits. On the both, unlike the smooth transitions in film, you have a short cutoff. You need to be able to sense the darker parts of shadows, and the brighter part of highlights. Gah4 (talk) 04:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Edits of 2–4 May 2007
I've edited the article in attempt to address many of the issues I mentioned. A few comments:

 * I eliminated the section 'Dynamic range' because I cannot find any relevance to the Zone System. Like  NathanHawking, I  have trouble seeing the "dynamic" in many contexts in which the term is now used, but in some, especially digital cameras and scanners, the train has left the station ... As it turns out, The Man himself used the term in the 1981 edition of The Negative, but he used it in a sense that probably was unique to him. An therein lies the problem ... More on this later. In general, I have avoided the use of "dynamic range" and used "exposure range" to reduce ambiguity.

 * The sections Exposure metering and Exposure zones are key to the basic concept of the Zone System. In essence, I've attempted to say that
 * 1) There is no definite relationship between average scene luminance and the rendering of key scene elements.
 * 2) Measuring individual scene elements still renders them as medium gray unless exposure is adjusted.
 * 3) Accordingly, one must meter individual scene elements and adjust the exposure based on the knowledge of what is being metered.
 * Others will need to judge whether I have conveyed this effectively.

 * With some reservations, I've avoided mentioning "print values" and used zones to refer to print values as well as exposure. I don't know whether it's more confusing to the beginner to make or avoid using different terms to distinguish. For example, properly, one would use N + 1 development to raise a Zone VII placement to Print Value VIII, though I've stated it as raising a Zone VII placement to Zone VIII.

 * I revised the section Zones as Texture and Detail to represent Adams's classifications, including a "dynamic range" comprising Zones I through IX; the previous version had the "dynamic range" comprising Zones II through VIII. The case probably could be made for several other interpretations, especially including Zones X through XII (or even beyond); the greatest problem that I see is that there are so many possible interpretations that the term in this context is almost without meaning. I think this section could be eliminated without great harm to the article.

 * I think the paragraph about cinematography in the previous section needs some clarification (I assume it is primarily directed at the limited exposure range of color film). I know nothing of cinematography, so I've done only minor copy editing.

 * I added specific sections for roll film, both black and white and color, negative and reversal, because so many people seem convinced that they cannot be used with the Zone System. Because mention of these items under Misconceptions became redundant, I retitled that section.

 * I've done some minor copy editing on the section on Digital photography, but I think it still needs work, especially in supporting the claim of a 10-step dynamic range. Perhaps this can be addressed with the Mother of All Footnotes. One issue that I see: even if Roger Clark's contention about the range is borne out by others, the range is very asymmetrical about Zone V, and avoiding such a clarification would seem likely to confuse.

 * I've cleaned up the references and added citations in the text; I used the "author-date" system (as it's known in the USA) to avoid conflict with the footnotes. Works not actually cited were moved to Further reading. I've avoided citation templates because the "Harvard" templates have a number of issues with complex references such as some for this article. The reference format conforms to that in the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed., Chapters 16 and 17 (except for ISO 6:1993, which follows the practice of ISO and most documents that cite standards.) I don't have Fazad, Johnson, Lav, or the 1995 reprint of The Negative, so I can't be certain they're absolutely correct. I think I have verified all of the ISBNs.

 * I've tried to use Adams's terminology (e.g., place, fall, raise, etc.) wherever possible. I noticed both "grey" and "gray" in the previous version; I changed instances of the former to "gray", as Adams would have used. To my knowledge, there isn't any other conflict between American and British English, but then again, my British isn't especially good. Given the subject, I would suggest that we stick with the 'Merkin flavor if an unavoidable conflict does arise. JeffConrad 10:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah, good work! Just two comments:
 * It might have been better to make the changes as a number of small edits instead of one big edit. That would be easier to follow. But you've described your edit here pretty well so it shouldn't matter.
 * The 'The Zone System is not difficult' section might be better titled "Criticisms" or "Misconceptions".
 * That's all. --Imroy 00:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I did it in one edit to ensure that the article was at least reasonably self consistent; I'm afraid I've have made quite a mess of things if I'd done it in small steps. With only one remaining misconception, the title seemingly would need to be singular as well. I like the sense of 'Misconception' (implying that the critics were wrong), but it doesn't seem quite right; I've changed to 'Criticism' for now. There must be a better choice, but cannot think of it at present. I suppose 'Criticism' is in better accord with NPOV. JeffConrad 01:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Back ... by popular demand ... 'Misconceptions'! The Zone-System-as true-religion myth seemed worthy of mention, as did Adams's anticipation of digital imaging. Once again, we can use the plural ...

I've cleaned up the 'Digital photography' section a bit, but it still needs work. JeffConrad 01:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Criticism
This article really neads a chapter about criticizm of the Zone System. I don't feel up to writing it right now, but in my opinion the ZS is a pseudoscientific and quasireligious belief system that is at best worthless and in practice an enormous hindrance to any form of photography. And it is antiquated to boot. To make it in the least practical you have to compromise it so much that it stops being the ZS. As a footnote that is cruel to anyone who has wasted any amount of effort on the ZS, and funny to anyone who hasn't, Adams took his most famous photograph, the Hernandez moonrise, by guessing the exposure. I'm sure that on a quiet day in Carmel you can still hear old Ansel gut-laughing in his grave. Maikel 00:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Is this serious or just a troll? --Imroy 14:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Difficult to say, but whichever, I don't think the suggestion merits further consideration—WP doesn't have an editorial page. There are quite a few Zone System haters, just as there are mesmerized devotees. Although many people have made the Zone System an exercise for its own sake, this approach certainly doesn't derive from any of Adams's books. I think this is adequately addressed in the Misconceptions section.
 * As for Ansel guessing the exposure for Moonrise, don't take the description in his later books too literally—see Reece Vogel's post at the end of this thread on photo.net for Adams's contemporaneous description of how the image was made. I have the same book from which Vogel quotes; the quote is accurate. Although this account doesn't use Zone System terminology, the principles are the same, so arguably, Adams did use the Zone System to determine the exposure. JeffConrad 01:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Does it really matter how Adams came up with the exposure? Did he ever claim that all of his photos or that specific photo use the Zone System for exposure? I doubt it. Photographers sometimes guess the exposure and it's no big deal. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Just because Adams came up with the Zone System does not make his use of another method (even guessing) a disapproval of it. --Imroy 05:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

 * It does not. Adams developed the Zone System as a means to an end; if another means would have accomplished the same end, I'm sure Adams would have been fine with it. As in so many cases, the disciples do not always rise to the level of the master, but in no way does this invalidate the Zone System. I mentioned the original account of Moonrise simply to question yet another photographic myth; it's really peripheral to the issue at hand. JeffConrad 06:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the very interesting link. So it is confirmed that Adams completely bullshitted about how he took the Hernandez Moonrise photograph?  Boy, this confirms my worst suspicions about him!  Wow, I'm floored!
 * But I don't understand what Vogel is saying in the question whether the film is Kodak Panatomic-X or AGfA Isopan: Vogel looked at the negative, counted the code notches, and then what?  (Quote:  And I checked the code notches and forget what film he used. -- that sentence doesn't make grammatical sense to me:  is he saying (about himself) "I forgot which film it is" or (to his readers) "forget about it, it's not important"?)
 * And how did he get to look at the negative in the first place? Maikel 21:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Subject Brightness Range
Subject Brightness Range (more properly, Subject Luminance Range, though the acronym is still usually SBR) is an alternative term for “dynamic range” or similar measures of scene luminance, but it is not synonymous with Zone System. JeffConrad 07:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Digital photography
It seems reasonable to remove the dynamic range claim for current digital SLRs, because no one has cited a reliable source despite the long-standing “citation needed” flag. However, the bit depth of digital capture really has little do with the exposure range, so it it doesn't belong in this section. The paragraph about digital dynamic might benefit from additional information about the capabilities of current digital cameras, but any claims should cite reliable sources.

I appreciate the attempt to trim some of the wording, but it is far from established that HDRI is the proper term for a combination of two different exposures to capture a high-contrast scene. The citation of Flickr in the HDRI article is not a reliable source by Wiki standards. The HDRI link was previously removed from the Digital photography section here because of that article’s minimal relevance to the Zone System, and this was apparently acceptable to the major contributors to this article. I don’t think the link should be restored without consensus of at least a few other editors. JeffConrad 00:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Link to LightZone
It's an interesting link, but the text added to the article reads like a commercial pitch. Anyone else feel the same way? In any event, it needs a bit of copy editing. JeffConrad (talk) 23:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

 * It does read like a commercial. The software sounds interesting, but it doesn't appear to be notable, and the text is not written in an encyclopaedic style. I also have my doubts about the second paragraph, concerning single-exposure HDRI. --Imroy (talk) 01:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The zone system and Histograms
I would like to add a small section describing how the histogram of a digital image can be used to enable the photographer to work with the zone system, both at the capture and image manipulation stage. The section will be added in late March if there are no objections. Manamarak 00:04, 25 February 2008 (GMT)

 * Be aware that Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. Giving information and general descriptions of techniques is fine - a step-by-step guide is not. And it should have one or more good sources. If your proposed section meets these requirements, I have no objections. --Imroy (talk) 18:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

 * This also smacks of original research. The proposed addition (or a summary) probably should be discussed here before being added to the article. That said, the same probably should have been done with some other material in the article. JeffConrad (talk) 21:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Zone system → Zone System — Ansel Adams (to the extent of my research) capitalized both words in his publications referring to this system—"Zone System", not "Zone system" as the page is currently titled. WP:CAPS says that "For multiword page titles, one should leave the second and subsequent words in lowercase unless the title phrase is a proper noun that would always occur capitalized, even in the middle of a sentence." "Zone System" is a proper noun, and as such, when appearing in the middle of a sentence (as it does many times in this article) always appears with both words capitalized. The current page name was moved from "Zone System" in 2004, but I think it is correct to capitalize both words. —Mono·nomic 02:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Support. What's to debate?  It's a proper name, per Adams (the best authority).  The page should be renamed accordingly. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Various photography reference books can be used to argue either way, but the ones that capitalize Zone System, ones by authors Ernst Wildi, Chris Johnson, Michael Freeman, Robert Hirsch, Carson Graves and Glenn Rand, prove to me the lasting legacy of the original Adams use of caps. Any lower case version would be a later development, by authors distancing the system from its originators. Binksternet (talk) 02:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. For the reasons stated above. In addition, it makes no sense lower case because the phrase isn't really descriptive; what exactly is a “zone system”?. It's much like a trademark except that it's a noun rather than an adjective. Like Hertz1888, I think Adams's treatment alone would suffice to justify the move. Add Fred Picker to the list of others who treat it as a proper noun. JeffConrad (talk) 05:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Revert of edits by Lik-photo
I reverted two edits by Lik-photo because, although I think they were well intended, they seemed capricious, and as nearly as I could tell, added nothing to the article. I'll certainly go along with consensus if some of the changes are thought worthwhile, but to me

 * We can't make statements like “We will omit zone 0 from the remainder of this tutorial; zone 1 will be considered pure black” because
 * 1) Wikipedia is not a how to guide.
 * 2) The decision to omit Zone 0 is arbitrary, unsupported, and in conflict with the rest of the article.
 * Comments like “Looks pretty good on my PC monitor, but may look very different on monitors and printers with different brightness curves (gammas)” are clearly inappropriate; I think the wording was fine as we had it.
 * Reformatting the tables seems utterly capricious, and to my eye, serves more to clutter than to clarify. The cell borders, which we went to some effort to avoid, also seem distracting.
 * The use of Arabic rather than Roman numerals seems contraindicated. I certainly think of zones that way when I use the Zone System, but in this article I think we should defer to Adams, if for no other reason than we have it sourced.
 * I think the paragraphs that begin “Any shined object ...” and “Division of a voice-frequency gradient ...” reflect a non–native English speaker (or a translation engine?). Even with cleanup, though, I'm not sure what they add, and in any event, they're unsourced. JeffConrad (talk) 09:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Any of the three, WP:NOTHOWTO, WP:OR, or sub-standard English, would seemingly be sufficient policy-based grounds individually for reverting the edits; in combination all the more so. I see nothing for which to apologize. Hertz1888 (talk) 10:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Translation into Russian. The book "the Theory and photo practice" 1978г. Michael Langford http://www.foto-art.land.ru/040-exp.html  http://www.foto-art.land.ru/041-zon.html

 * This is the English Wikipedia. Given the number of solid sources we have, I see no need to cite a non-English source. And in any event, material added should be in reasonable English. JeffConrad (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

2 in degree 8( jpeg,tiff,psd,bmp,gif) =   0step_2^0=1_Istep_2^1=2_IIstep_2^2=4_IIIstep_2^3=8_IVstep_ 2^3=16_Vstep_2^5=32_VIstep_2^5=64_VIIstep_2^6=128_VIIIstep_2^7=267_IXstep_ ===_10step_

It is a photo basis, and a geometrical progression - the elementary mathematics.

 * I think most of us are familiar with the progression—what we're less convinced of is the appropriateness of the material. JeffConrad (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

11-??????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lik-photo (talk • contribs) 12:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrectly written article not an occasion to alter Adams's theory !!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lik-photo (talk • contribs) 12:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Sorry - the English is nearly incomprehensible. Even with better translation the material may not be suitable for inclusion.  Please respect the WP:BRD policy and do not reintroduce this edit without first obtaining consensus here on the talk page. Hertz1888 (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Most of us are quite familiar with Adams, and frequently cite him directly. If you think the article is incorrect, please indicate why you think so rather than simply making statements like this, which are essentially meaningless. Additionally, I mentioned several items that directly violate Wikipedia policy—please discuss them if you disagree. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes ( ~ ) JeffConrad (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

http://narod.ru/disk/25792574000/01.jpg.html book of Tom Ang  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lik-photo (talk • contribs) 20:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC) Lik-photo (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)I have given the reference to the printing edition and have calculated mathematics of zones of Adams. In article Adams's zonal theory is deformed.

11 zones contradict a graphic file 2^8 = 256 is 8 zones both completely black and completely white is 2 more zones. Only 10 zones. At increase in light exposure of each step in 2 times - an exposition basis.

Values of zones

1 from 1 to 2 11 from 2 to 4 111 from 4 to 8 1V from 8 to 16 V from 16 to 32 V1 From 32 to 64 V11 From 64 to 128 V111 From 128 to 256

Total 8 zones have width 1-256 is added 2 zones

0 - it is less 1 1X more than 256 Total 10

The zonal system is shifted under the digital technics on 1 unit that is not 1-256, but 0-255. It is a format of ALL graphic files.

Now try paint value of a graphic file 0-255 on 11 steps.....)))))

At you not editors, instead of competent people...)))) Which didn't read Adams's zonal theory.

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Зонная_теория_Адамса Lik-photo (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

 * It's important to remember that Adams distinguished between exposure zones and print values (which roughly correspond to digital values), as this article clearly points out. Within reason, a photographer can have any number of exposure zones between pure black and pure white. With film, the development is varied; with digital capture, the manipulation is done in software. So the advent of digital technology did nothing to alter Adams's system; if anything, it has made it even more applicable. Those familiar with the Zone System usually have little difficulty mastering curves.

 * If you have specific ideas for improving the article, they're more than open to discussion. But insulting other editors won't accomplish anything but eventually getting you blocked. I can only speak for myself, but I've read ten of Adams's technical books, and at least as many of his other works. I've used the Zone System for over 30 years, so I think I understand the principles quite well. The same is probably true for many of the others who have contributed to this article. JeffConrad (talk) 22:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Gamma
In the article: Use of the Zone System with color film is similar to that with black-and-white roll film, except that the exposure range is somewhat less, so that there are fewer zones between black and white. As well as I know it, color negative films have a lower gamma (contrast) such that they have more latitude (exposure range) than black and white films. Printing papers have the opposite, but this requires accurate exposure at print time. The mask on C41 films reduces the range somewhat, but I believe that there is still more than B&W film. The sensitivity charts for Kodak film are on their web site. Gah4 (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

worked out by Fred Archer and myself at the Art Center School in Los Angeles,
worked out by Fred Archer and myself at the Art Center School in Los Angeles, It seems that the school change name in 1965, so the quote is correct. Would it be useful to Wikilink to the school's page? Gah4 (talk) 04:14, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

I think the shades are wrong
The shades of grey used in the article don't look right to me.

What you point at with the light meter → what the meter will give you according to the article: Scene area in zone V → exposure stops to use Scene area in zone III → exposure stops to use + 2

This makes sense. If you point the meter to an area that's darker than the meter expects, it will give you a higher exposure than you should use.

Let y = Y / Y₀ for some reference grey Y₀; m(yV) is what the meter needs to give you for consistent results.

So m(yV) = m₀ – ²log yV where m₀ depends on exposure time, film and optics.

Combining this with our starting point and substituting, we get:

m(yIII) = m₀ – ²log yV + 2 but also = m₀ – ²log yIII m₀ – ²log yIII = m₀ – ²log yV + 2 ²log yIII = ²log(yV / 4) yIII = yV / 4

So the zone number Z(y) should be ²log(y) + Z₀ where Z₀ is the zone number of the reference grey. For example, if the reference grey is in the middle of zone V (YV = Y₀) you'd get ²log(Y₀/Y₀) + 5 = ²log 1 + 5 = 5. If YV = 2Y₀ you'd get Z(YV) = ²log 2 + 4 = 5 and of course Z(YVI) = ²log 4 + 4 = 6 and so on.

If we assume that all the tones in zone X are completely blown out but those in zone IX are not, it would follow that:

Z(Yw / Y₀) = 9½ ²log(Yw / Y₀) + Z₀ = 9½ Z₀ = 9½ – ²log(Yw / Y₀) Z(ȳ Yw / Y₀) = ²log(ȳ Yw / Y₀) + 9½ – ²log(Yw / Y₀) = ²log(ȳ) + 9½ ȳ = 2Z(ȳ Yw / Y₀) - 9½

So the geometric mean shades in each zone should be:

0　 　I　 　II　 　III　 　IV　 　V　 　VI　 　VII　 　VIII　 　IX　 　X

You might consider these tones quite dark, especially if you thought the tones presently used in the article were correct, but consider that VIII and IX are bright as snow. Snow is quite bright. Have a look as this skier: https://etsy.com/listing/573318057/snow-skier-skiing-vintage-photo-print Using a colour picker, avoiding the highlights on the right of his face and the dark shadows on the left, I get an sRGB brightness value of 110 or thereabouts: 　　 That falls somewhere between shades VI and VII on the scale above, right where the article says it should.

Of course, when developing a picture you can opt to make it brighter if it doesn't contain snow. But the fact remains that the luminance ratio between the zones should still be 2 and this isn't remotely true for the shades presented in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Creating new graphics for the article
Test background to make checking for colour bleed easier. End test background. 77.61.180.106 (talk) 12:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC) Remark: it might be useful to put these graphics on a darker background, because Wikipedia's default background is bright white. Note also that a few of the darkest shades are technically wrong, but because of the bright background you can't really tell. For reference, the linear onset thresholds are approximately at sRGB 23.5 for LAB and at 10.3 for sRGB itself (0.00885645 and 0.00313080 in linear light, zone III and I). 77.61.180.106 (talk) 13:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I think the benefits of using a dark background are obvious, but then the gradients would have to be checked to see how bad the deviations are. 77.61.180.106 (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

 * It seems that there is a problem with the last two pictures. At least on my computer and when downloading the article as a PDF, the graphics are not rendered and the rendering commands are displayed instead. 78.116.155.233 (talk) 21:40, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

How to account for the logarithmic nature of film and the toe and shoulder of the response curve
The article glosses over this, saying that when using normal development, tonal relations will remain the same. But I think there should be some justification for this, because it isn't at all obvious to me that this should necessarily be the case.

Black and white film is often said to be roughly logarithmic for a wide range of tones, with a bit of an onset, or toe, in the black part of its range and a plateau, or shoulder, at the white end, where the film gets saturated.

Now, my intuitive answer to this would be that the response curve for the negative bulges up a bit, so the curve for the light shining through the negative when creating a print bulges down a bit and this is compensated for by the response curve of the print bulging up a bit. But is this really so?

And then there's the issue that if you want paper-white specular highlights, you either have to accept the shoulder of the negative (to make the negative as black as possible) or the toe of the print (to avoid leaking light affecting the print) or a bit of both.

I have developed pictures in the past using chemical baths in a dark room, but that was in the nineties, and back then I had no real understanding beyond ‘light goes in, picture forms, cool’.

Inverse square law error
In The Negative, I found a glaring error in the application of the inverse square law. In the passage where he talks about the appearance of sheets of paper in a dark room with a window, Adams takes the distance in the law to be the distance to the window whereas in reality the relevant distance is the distance to the sun. This means that the inverse square law is going to yield essentially a constant. It's fairly easy to replicate Adams' setup and experimentally verify this and I encourage you to do so. Adams either was imagining the situation – wrongly! – or he used a small light source such as a light bulb, but in that case I don't know why he would have felt the need to change the light source in the text, as windows don't behave like light point lights in the slightest. I don't think Vermeer would have slipped up like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 10:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * If Adams was referring to a sheet of paper illuminated by direct sunshine through a window then you would be correct. I have not read the source, but it seems likely that Adams was referring to diffuse light reflected from the surroundings outside the window. Verbcatcher (talk) 16:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Even then he would not have been correct, because in that case the average distance to the diffusely reflecting surroundings in question and the apparent size of the window as seen from the sheet of paper would be the important factors. The more I read that paragraph, the less sense it makes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Zone System


text: Category:1626 deaths

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Category:1626 deaths


text: Category:1627 deaths

title: Category:1627 deaths


text: Category:1628 deaths

title: Category:1628 deaths


text: Category:1629 deaths

title: Category:1629 deaths


text: Category:1630 deaths

title: Category:1630 deaths


text: Category:1631 deaths

title: Category:1631 deaths


text: Category:1632 deaths

title: Category:1632 deaths


text:
User:Obradovic Goran

$$y=\frac{\sqrt{9-x^2}}{\sqrt{9-x^2}}-1; x=\frac{\sqrt{9-y^2}}{\sqrt{9-y^2}}-1$$ $$(x\pm2)^2+(y\pm2)^2=1.5^2, x\in(-3, 3)$$ So what if I'm a geek :)

No goal is unreachable, no effort is futile!

What is wrong with this picture? (answer)

da:Bruger:Obradovic Goran sl:Uporabnik:Obradovic Goran sr:Корисник:Обрадовић Горан

title: User:Obradovic Goran


text: Category:1633 deaths

title: Category:1633 deaths


text: Category:1634 deaths

title: Category:1634 deaths


text: Category:1635 deaths

title: Category:1635 deaths


text: Category:1636 deaths

title: Category:1636 deaths


text:
Qafiya

In Persian, Turkic, and Urdu ghazals, the qāfiya (from Arabic قافية qāfiya, lit. 'rhyme'; ; qafiyə; قافیہ; qofiya) is the rhyming pattern of words that must directly precede the radif. The qāfiya is the actual rhyme of the ghazal.

title: Qafiya


text: Category:1637 deaths

title: Category:1637 deaths


text: Category:1638 deaths

title: Category:1638 deaths


text: Category:1639 deaths

title: Category:1639 deaths


text: Category:1640 deaths

title: Category:1640 deaths


text: Category:1641 deaths

title: Category:1641 deaths


text: Category:1642 deaths

title: Category:1642 deaths


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rex's copy from Stolen Honor talk page

additional material deleted
I removed this material just now with edit summary which explains reason for removal: "remove additional sherwood personal material - please repost this on sherwood personal article - Stolen Honor is article is not about Sherwood, per se but other article is". 17:34, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

''':While Sherwood shared in a group Pulitzer for investigation of a fund-raising scandal involving a Vatican cover-up, the neutrality of his reportage has been questioned. In 1992 the PBS program Frontline examined Sherwood's book Inquisition, which claimed to be an independent investigation of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon. During that investigation, a letter surfaced in which James Gavin, an aide to Reverend Moon, stated that he had reviewed the book before publication, and suggested revisions that Sherwood had promised he would incorporate before the final manuscript went to the publisher. Sherwood had previously worked for the Washington Times, owned by Moon and the Unification Church.'''

 * I don't have too much of a problem, except what is the criteria for removing content of a central figure on another page, i.e. Glenn Smith on TfT and John O'Neill on SBVT?? I would suggest looking at either or both criteria to set policy rather than on a case-by-case basis:

 * Person has a significant amount of information that would go beyond a mere stub.
 * Person is known for any significant reason beyond founding the group.

 * Just a thought. --kizzle 17:40, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * Feel free to make John O'Neill and Glenn Smith pages. This in fact, is the right way to go. Also, the infor which should go in on the personal pages ias all the personal flaws and foibles. They must go there so that any tit-for-tat edits and rebutals do not glog up related pages. This is the rule that was intsituted at TfT and which get rebuttals off that page: TfT argumwents are about issues relating to GWBMSC and for that reason are shunted there. Same thing here. Sherwood persomnal issues are about Sherwood himself. Glogging SH is POV edits such as Gamaliel is demanding is farcical. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 [[Image:Happyjoe.jpg]] ]] 17:57, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If this stuff on Sherwood goes, all of the info on Sherwood should go, including the "decorated Vietnam veteran" and "pulitzer prize winner", as none of that relates to SH either. You can't keep the good Sherwood info and then ship off the Moonie stuff to another article. 17:44, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Gamaliel, you are totally off base again. A limited about of personal detail is fine as it helps segue the atricle flow in a rational manner. You are simply trying to inject "moonie" accusations here to discredit Stolen Honor itself. Frankly, the more you edit, the more it;s clear that your bias is the soruce of conflict. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 [[Image:Happyjoe.jpg]] ]] 17:53, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * No matter how many words you put in bold it won't change the fact that you are sugarcoating Sherwood's background by including only positive things about him like his pulitzer and his Vietnam service and excluding negative things about him like his moonie connections. Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 17:59, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The "Tom Ridge" connection is included at JML's insistance - as it tends to show Republican connections - a valid point to raise in a partisan race. The "moonie" accusation is a more generalized slur and belongs only on personal page -if anywhere. Also please note for the record that Gamaliel (see above) expressly calls the "moonie" connection a negative. This is precisely what I have said Gamaliel is up to: trying to insert POV material to drag down Sherwood and with him, the validity of the documentary itself. POV bias laid bare! 18:00, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Way to go Perry Mason. Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 18:12, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * By saying to exclude all the Information, Gamaliel is attempting to INCLUDE POV stuff? Lyellin 18:17, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * I thought the key point of the passage about Sherwood's book was not that he had ties to the Unification Church, but rather that, while purporting to produce an independent investigation, he was actually giving the subject of the investigation prior review of the text, and even making changes requested by the subject. This violation of normal journalistic procedure is relevant to his credibility.  JamesMLane 18:53, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

JML, if (and only if) you can make a rational case for journalistic flaws, provided that there is a genuine - and reported on - issue there, then it would be enough to detail that issue on the personal page and have a one or two sentence pointer link to that page. Personal problems belong on the personal page. I am simply amazed at how you are disregarding the very principles you've previously insisted on regarding segregation of material. Frankly, you are simply trying to muck things up here. This is the lowest you have ever stooped. 18:58, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would like to share the following information which Rex just left on my talk page:

 * If you restore that text again, I am going to file an RfA against you. Rex071404 19:16, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

He is, of course, referring to the text discussed here, which he has currently reverted five times in about 2-3 hours. I assume that, if it comes to the RfA he threatens, I will have witnesses that the issue had not been "already been debated and resolved", as he claimed? -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:37, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Rex just makes it up as he goes along. Let him file, there's already two open RfAs against him.  It'll just save us the trouble of filing the third.  Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 19:42, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


text: Category:1643 deaths

title: Category:1643 deaths


text:
The Black Seeds

The Black Seeds are a reggae inspired musical group from Wellington, New Zealand. Their rocksteady song "One By One" became an international hit when it was played in top ranked TV series Breaking Bad. Their music is a mixture of big beat funk, dub, afro music, pop, rock, soul, and roots reggae/ragga.

Formed in 1998, The Black Seeds perform with eight members, with instruments including vocals, guitar, saxophone, trumpet, bass, drums, bongos, keyboard and wood block. Black Seeds first album, Keep on Pushing, was released 2001 following a number of live performances. Already very successful in New Zealand and popular in Australia, Europe and North & South America, their third album Into the Dojo (2007) introduced Black Seeds internationally. They have released five albums, a live album, and two remix albums. They have two double-platinum selling albums in New Zealand, and successful European album releases through the German-based Sonar Kollektiv label. In 2011 Black Seeds was described by Rolling Stone as "The Best Reggae band in the world right now".

Lead singer Barnaby Weir, the son of veteran radio broadcaster Dick Weir, is also associated with the side-projects Fly My Pretties and Flash Harry. Former band member Bret McKenzie is also a member of international award-winning comedy duo Flight of the Conchords, as well as playing the role of Figwit the elf in Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings.

The band released their 6th studio album "Fabric" in early September 2017.

Their song "One by One" was used in AMC's Breaking Bad Season 2 Episode, "4 Days Out" and also appears on the series' official soundtrack.

Discography

 * Keep On Pushing LP (2001)
 * On the Sun (2004)
 * Into the Dojo (2006)
 * Solid Ground (2008)
 * The Black Seeds Live – Vol 1 (2009)
 * Specials: remixes and versions off Solid Ground (2010)
 * Dust And Dirt (2012)
 * Fabric (2017)
 * Love & Fire (2022)

title: The Black Seeds


text: Category:1644 deaths

title: Category:1644 deaths


text: Category:1645 deaths

title: Category:1645 deaths


text: Category:1646 deaths

title: Category:1646 deaths


text: Category:1647 deaths

title: Category:1647 deaths


text: Category:1648 deaths

title: Category:1648 deaths


text: Category:1649 deaths

title: Category:1649 deaths


text: Category:1650 deaths

title: Category:1650 deaths


text:
Mirpur Khas

Mirpur Khas (Sindhi and ; meaning "Town of the most-high Mirs") is a village in Sindh province, Pakistan.. The city was built by Talpur rulers of Mankani branch. According to the 2017 Census of Pakistan, its population is 205913. Mirpur Khas is known for its mango cultivation, with hundreds of varieties of the fruit produced each year - it is also called the “City of Mangoes,” and has been home to an annual mango festival since 1955. After the completion of Hyderabad-Mirpurkhas dual carriage way, the city has become hub of commercial activities.

Early
The Mirpur Khas region has been inhabited for millennia, as evidenced by the excavation of the Buddhist-era settlement of Kahoo Jo Daro and various hindu temples.The remnants of them still remain. The famous Bronze of hindu believed god brahma from gupta dynasty (5th or 6th century bronze) has been excavated from here It is the earliest known metallic image of Brahma, and the only known representative of the school it represents. It has been described as "an immense artistic creation" of the Gupta period. In 712 CE, the region was conquered by the armies of Muhammad Bin Qasim.

Founding
The Talpur dynasty conquered Sindh in 1784, and under Mir Fath Ali Khan, Sindh was divided into three smaller regions to be ruled by members of the Talpur family. The three regions were centred around Hyderabad, Khairpur, and Mirpur Khas. The Mankani branch of the family under Mir Ali Murad Talpur inherited the region around Mirpur Khas in 1801, and founded the new city of Mirpur Khas in 1806 to serve as the new capital.

Mirpur Khas State
Mir Sher Muhammad Talpur (1829-1843) succeeded Mir Ali Murad, and built a fort in the city when he declared the ruler of the state, and ran a kutchery from within the fort. Elaborate graves for the local rulers were built at Chitorri, and feature a syncretic architectural style that combines elements of Islamic and Rajasthani architecture.

Mirpur Khas remained the capital of the Talpur Mirs of Mirpurkhas until 1843, when Sindh was annexed to British India under the East India Company following the conquest of Sindh by Charles James Napier and defeat of Mir Sher Muhammad Talpur on 24 March 1843 at the battleground of Dubbo. His battle for the Sindh state earned him the moniker "Lion of Sindh."

British
Later Sindh was made part of the colonial Bombay Presidency and Mirpurkhas was a part of it. Umerkot was made the district's headquarters of town of Thar and Parkar district and Mirpur Khas was ignored until the advent of the Luni-Hyderabad branch of the Jodhpur-Bikaner Railway, a subsidiary of the Scinde Railway to the town. The opening of the Jamrao Canal in 1900 made Mirpur Khas stand out of the rest of the towns in the district. It was constituted a municipality in 1901 and the district headquarters was shifted from Umerkot to Mirpurkhas in 1906.

At the turn of the twentieth century, the population of the town was 2,787 persons with a density of 82 persons         per square mile, howev Hall rahy is famous Dailouge

After the independence of Pakistan in 1947, because of its proximity with the Indian border, Mirpur Khas became the first city to welcome refugees to Pakistan. It served as a primary railway junction for the first trains to rail across the Rajasthan to the Sindh province. The Partition of British India resulted in the large-scale exodus of much of the city's Hindu population, though like much of Sindh, Mirpur Khas did not experience the widespread rioting that occurred in Punjab and Bengal. In all, less than 500 Hindu were killed in all of Sindh between 1947-48 as Sindhi Muslims largely resisted calls to turn against their Hindu neighbours. Hindus did not flee Sindh en masse until riots erupted in Karachi on 6 January 1948, which sowed fear in Sindh's Hindus despite the fact that the riots were local and regarded Sikh refugees from Punjab seeking refuge in Karachi. Despite the loss of much of the city's Hindu population, Mirpur Khas District is estimated as 35% populated by Hindus.

Large numbers of refugees from India began arriving in the city following the Partition of British India - leading to rapid population rises and a shift in demography. In 1951, the population was 40,420, of which 68% were Urdu-speaking refugees that had fled India - the highest percentage of any major urban area in Sindh. The population rose further to 60,861 in the 1961 census. The Mirpur Khas tehsil was upgraded to a district and divide the Thar and Parkar district in 1990.

History of Cricket
In 1976/77 World XI came to play a match in Gama Stadium, Mirpurkhas and World XI won that match, Soon after a match was played between Sind XI and Sri Lanka XI that Sri Lanka XI won.

Geography
Lying on the Let Wah Canal at 25.52758°N, 69.01406°W, Mirpur Khas is located in the south-eastern quadrant of Sindh. It is located 65 kilometers east of Hyderabad, to which it is connected by Four Lane Dual Carrgiway highway to Hyderabad and by Rail. It is linked to Umerkot by N120 Highway. Karachi is 220 kilometres south-west of Mirpur Khas. The Indian border is located 170 kilometres east of the city.

Demographics

The city of Mirpur Khas has very different demographics than to the district as a whole. Mirpur Khas MC had a population of 234,133. Mirpur Khas had a sex ratio of 949 females per 1000 males and a literacy rate of 75.62%: 80.27% for males and 70.74% for females. 54,045 (23.08%) were under 10 years of age.

At the time of the 2017 census, 59.31% of the population spoke Sindhi, 20.66% Urdu, 10.15% Punjabi, 4.73% Balochi, 2.19% Pashto and 0.99% Saraiki as their first language.

Mirpurakhas is home to some of notable Sindhi Muslim tribes like, Soomras, Khaskhelis, Mallah, Dharejo, Junejo, Rajper, Samejo.

Mirpurkhas has also very large minority of Sindhi Hindus who are mostly in business.

In late 18th century, many Muslim families were shifted from east Punjab to the area. The biggest Muslim community who settled here was the Arain community. The Arains from various districts of eastern Punjab such as Amritsar, Gurdaspur, Ferozpur, Ambala, Patiala and Jalandhar moved here and permanently settled. Near Mirpur Khas is a disused Sikh temple named the Gurdwara Pehli Patshahi, built on the site where the founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak, is traditionally believed to have placed his feet.

Education
The city has many government colleges, mostly affiliated with the University of Sindh. Mirpur Khas also has a registered PMDC private medical college, Muhammad Medical College and Bhitai Dental and Medical College. Mirpur Khas has a Sindh University campus with five-degree programs: BS-Information Technology, BS-Computer Science, BS-Commerce, BBA, and BS-Geology. The city has numerous schools, both private and public. The number of private schools has increased since last decade. Notable schools are The Vision School Mirpurkhas, Fauji Faundation Model School, The City School, SZABIST School & College, Little Folks High School, Govt: S.A.L College, AJ Science College and most famous Bahria Foundation College which is a project of Pakistan Navy.

The city is also growing with many tuition centre facilities, especially for IX, X, XI and XII classes and also preparing students for entry tests, mainly the MCAT (Medical College Admission Test) and ECAT (Engineering College Admission Test).

Mirpurkhas city has now its own board for examinations called BISE (Board of Intermediate and Secondary Examinations). Previously Mirpurkhas did not have its own affiliated board for examinations of SSC and HSSC education which is undertaken by government affiliations and registration and number of examination boards development in Pakistan are based according to districts, in which every city/village fall under district are guided for examinations in which the city/village is linked. Mirpurkhas previously fell under District Hyderabad, Sindh.

Besides, Public Libraries in Sindh often appear to receive a dwindling response but in some, with every passing day, the number of readers is increasing. Sindh Government Public Library, Mirpurkhas is one of the best place for readers / scholars of all ages. The Library is situated near Ibn-e-Rushd Girls College, beside Mahar Cinema, Heerabad Mirpurkhas. The facilities in the library are as under: 1. Newspapers & Periodical Section 2. Computer Section 3. CSS Section 4. Stack Section 5. Reading Hall for Boys 6. Ladies & Children Section 7. Art Gallery 8. Bookshop of Culture Department 9. SMBB Corner

Economy
Though Mirpurkhas has a small industrial park, no industry is functional there. There are four sugar mills, as well as some cotton ginning, and edible oil mills in the city. The city's economy has been adversely effected by a poor law and order situation, with violent conflict between rival families.

Agriculture
The district's very fertile land produces wheat, onion, sugarcane, cotton, chillies, and mangoes. Irrigation and farming was revitalised after the Jamrao Canal was built in the 1900s. Afterwards, the city was able to produce and cycle crops to supply mainly grain, cotton products like fabrics, and sugar from the sugarcane cultivation. For a certain period in history, Mirpurkhas enjoyed being the best cotton producer in the country and much of the income of the town came from cotton farming in its heyday.

Nowadays, however, the area is much known its mango produce. The city claims to have 252 different varieties of mangoes, of which the most famous variety is the Sindhri Amb, literally the mango from Sindh. The city boasts its mango products at an annual harvest festival showcasing its world-renowned produce.

Mirpur Khas is positioned atop a fertile land making conditions apt for farming and irrigation. Being connected to the Indus via irrigation canals like the Let Wah, Mirpur Khas has gained an advantage in horticulture and farming over the years. Bananas are also widely cultivated around the region and also one of the biggest producer of bananas in the country.

Railway
Mirpur Khas Railway Station is in middle of city. After 40 years a railway link between Pakistan and India is being opened again. A broad gauge line has been laid from Mirpurkhas to Khokhrapar, which is the border town from Pakistani Side. The new link now connects Karachi (Pakistan) to Jodhpur (India) by the new train service Thar Express. In 2005, work started on converting the metre gauge railway line to Khokhrapar to broad gauge. Mirpurkhas Railway Station has one of the longest platforms in Pakistan.

Peoples Bus Service
On 21 April, 2024 Sharjeel Inam Memon inaugurated the Peoples Bus Service in Mirpur Khas. In the initial basis the Peoples Bus Service will start from Mirpur Khas Bus Terminal Via Post Office Chowk, Satellite Town, Jarwari Shakh.

Localities

 * Lalchandabad

Sources and external links

 * WorldSatesmen - Pakistan - Princely States

title: Mirpur Khas


text: Category:1651 deaths

title: Category:1651 deaths


text: Category:1652 deaths

title: Category:1652 deaths


text: Category:1653 deaths

title: Category:1653 deaths


text: Category:1654 deaths

title: Category:1654 deaths


text: Category:1655 deaths

title: Category:1655 deaths


text: Category:1656 deaths

title: Category:1656 deaths


text: Category:1657 deaths

title: Category:1657 deaths


text: Category:1658 deaths

title: Category:1658 deaths


text: Category:1659 deaths

title: Category:1659 deaths


text: Category:1660 deaths

title: Category:1660 deaths


text:
User talk:Otamian

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

File source problem with File:LingaWorship.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:LingaWorship.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Otamian


text: Category:1661 deaths

title: Category:1661 deaths


text: Category:1662 deaths

title: Category:1662 deaths


text: Category:1663 deaths

title: Category:1663 deaths


text: Category:1664 deaths

title: Category:1664 deaths


text: Category:1665 deaths

title: Category:1665 deaths


text: Category:1666 deaths

title: Category:1666 deaths


text: Category:1667 deaths

title: Category:1667 deaths


text: Category:1668 deaths

title: Category:1668 deaths


text: Category:1669 deaths

title: Category:1669 deaths


text: Category:1670 deaths

title: Category:1670 deaths


text: Category:1671 deaths

title: Category:1671 deaths


text: Category:1672 deaths

title: Category:1672 deaths


text: Category:1673 deaths

title: Category:1673 deaths


text: Category:1674 deaths

title: Category:1674 deaths


text: Category:1675 deaths

title: Category:1675 deaths


text: Category:1676 deaths

title: Category:1676 deaths


text: Category:1677 deaths

title: Category:1677 deaths


text: Category:1678 deaths

title: Category:1678 deaths


text: Category:1679 deaths

title: Category:1679 deaths


text: Category:1680 deaths

title: Category:1680 deaths


text: Category:1681 deaths

title: Category:1681 deaths


text: Category:1682 deaths

title: Category:1682 deaths


text: Category:1683 deaths

title: Category:1683 deaths


text: Category:1684 deaths

title: Category:1684 deaths


text: Category:1685 deaths

title: Category:1685 deaths


text: Category:1687 deaths

title: Category:1687 deaths


text: Category:1688 deaths

title: Category:1688 deaths


text: Category:1689 deaths

title: Category:1689 deaths


text: Category:1690 deaths

title: Category:1690 deaths


text: Category:1691 deaths

title: Category:1691 deaths


text: Category:1692 deaths

title: Category:1692 deaths


text:
P4P

P4P may refer to:

 * Ring Magazine pound for pound
 * Pay for performance (disambiguation), in health care, human resources, advertising, etc.
 * Pay for perks, a business model in online games where players can purchase virtual assets.
 * Pay for placement, an advertising method in which relevant ads are placed next to results from a search engine.
 * Pound for pound, a term in combat sports used to describe a fighter's value in relation to fighters in other weight classes.
 * Proactive network Provider Participation for P2P, a means for internet providers to optimize Peer-to-peer (P2P) traffic flow.
 * Purchase for Progress, a United Nations World Food Programme initiative.
 * Serosorting, otherwise known as "Poz4Poz" or "Poz4Play".
 * Pay-for-Play, exchange of money for the privilege to engage in a specific activity.
 * Pedals for Progress, a non-profit organization collecting bicycles and sewing machines.

title: P4P


text: Category:1693 deaths

title: Category:1693 deaths


text: Category:1694 deaths

title: Category:1694 deaths


text: Category:1695 deaths

title: Category:1695 deaths


text: User talk:68.56.212.55

title: User talk:68.56.212.55


text: Category:1696 deaths

title: Category:1696 deaths


text: Category:1697 deaths

title: Category:1697 deaths


text: Category:1698 deaths

title: Category:1698 deaths


text: Category:1699 deaths

title: Category:1699 deaths


text: Category:1590 births

title: Category:1590 births


text: User talk:66.200.64.6

title: User talk:66.200.64.6


text: Category:1591 births

title: Category:1591 births


text: Category:1592 births

title: Category:1592 births


text: Category:1593 births

title: Category:1593 births


text: Category:1594 births

title: Category:1594 births


text: Category:1595 births

title: Category:1595 births


text: Category:1596 births

title: Category:1596 births


text:
Daagh Dehlvi

Nawab Mirza Khan Daagh Dehlvi (, 25 May 1831 – 17 March 1905) was a poet known for his Urdu ghazals. He belonged to the old Delhi school of Urdu poetry.

He wrote romantic and sensuous poems and ghazals in simple and chaste Urdu, minimising usage of Persian words. He laid great emphasis on the Urdu idiom and its usage. He wrote under the takhallus (Urdu word for pen name) Daagh Dehlvi (the meanings of Daagh, an Urdu noun, include stain, grief and taint while Dehlvi means belonging to or from Dehli or Delhi). He belonged to the Delhi school of thought.

His honorific Dabeer ud Dawla, Faseeh ul Mulk, Nawab Nizam Jang Bahadur, Sipah Salar, Yar-e-Wafadar, Muqrib-us-Sultan, Bulbul-e-Hindustan, Jahan Ustad, Nazim Yar Jung, were the titles bestowed upon him by the sixth Nizam of Hyderabad Mir Mahbub Ali Khan.

Daagh was considered one of the best romantic poets of his time by some commentators.

Early life
Dehlvi was born in Kucha Ustad Dagh, Chandni Chowk in Delhi to Nawab Shamsuddin Ahmed Khan, the ruler of Loharu and Ferozepur Jhirka and Wazir Khanum, daughter of a Delhi jeweller. Dehlvi's father was hanged under charges of conspiracy in the murder of William Fraser. Dehlvi at the age of four and his mother at age thirty four, the most sought after lady, wooed and remarried the Mughal crown prince, Mirza Muhammad Fakhroo, an heir to the last Mughal Bahadur Shah Zafar. Hence, Dehlvi had the privileged education at the Delhi Red Fort, There he received best of education and was later under tutelage of poet laureate, Mohammad Ibrahim Zauq. Later, he also took advice from Ghalib on finer nuances of Urdu literature and poetry. He was also trained in calligraphy and horse riding.

Literary life
Dehlvi belonged to the Dabistan-e-Dehli (Dehli school of thought) and never allowed western influences on his poetry. He started reciting poetry at the age of ten and his forte was the romantic version, the ghazal. He became popular for his poetry. Unlike the elitist style by the poets of the time, his style was simple and was well received by both, the common man and the elite.

After Fakhroo's death in 1856, Dehlvi along with his mother left Delhi after facing turbulent times, for Rampur State and came under the aegis of Nawab of Rampur, Yusuf Ali Khan Bahadur. He went into government service there and lived well for 24 years.

Later life in Hyderabad Deccan
Dehlvi stayed in Hyderabad in 1888 for several months. He left Hyderabad after not being invited to the court by the Mahbub Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VI's court, as access to his court was very limited. He then was invited immediately and was appointed as the court poet and mentor, in 1891, to the Sixth Nizam Mahbub Ali Khan, Asaf Jah VI, at the age of 60.

Contrary to the impression one gets from his poetry, he did not drink wine and shunned it.

His couplet on Urdu language was:

Death
He died in 1905 at the age of 74 in Hyderabad Deccan after a paralytic stroke. He was buried at Dargah Yousufain in Hyderabad.

Disciples
Dehlvi's students included Allama Iqbal, Hassan Raza Khan (1859-1908), Jigar Moradabadi (1890 – 1960), Seemab Akbarabadi and Ahasan Marharavi, though a widely quoted anecdote relates that when asked to designate his successor as the leading Urdu poet of his age, he replied Bekhudain [the two Bekhuds], referring to Bekhud Badayuni and Bekhud Dehlvi.

Popular ghazal songs
His selected ghazals are rendered by contemporary ghazal singers, Jagjit Singh, Noor Jahan, Iqbal Bano, Ghulam Ali, Adithya Srinivasan, Malika Pukhraj, Mehdi Hassan, Abida Parveen, Begum Akhtar, Pankaj Udhas and Farida Khanum.

title: Daagh Dehlvi


text: Category:1597 births

title: Category:1597 births


text: Category:1598 births

title: Category:1598 births


text: Category:1599 births

title: Category:1599 births


text: Category:1601 births

title: Category:1601 births


text: Category:1602 births

title: Category:1602 births


text: Category:1603 births

title: Category:1603 births


text:
User talk:Jamalpanhwar

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

title: User talk:Jamalpanhwar


text: Category:1604 births

title: Category:1604 births


text: Category:1605 births

title: Category:1605 births


text:
Boeing Rotorcraft Systems

Boeing Rotorcraft Systems (formerly Boeing Helicopters and before that Boeing Vertol) is the former name of an American aircraft manufacturer, now known as Vertical Lift division of Boeing Defense, Space & Security.

The headquarters and main rotorcraft factory is in Ridley Park, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia. Production of Apache attack helicopters in Mesa, Arizona, formerly part of Rotorcraft Systems, is now under the Global Strike Division of Boeing Military Aircraft.

Background
Boeing Helicopters was created as Boeing Vertol when the Vertol Aircraft Corporation (formerly Piasecki Helicopter) company of Morton, Pennsylvania was acquired by Boeing in 1960; the Vertol name was an abbreviation for Vertical Take Off and Landing. Other names by which the division sometimes referred to itself in correspondence over the years were "Boeing Aircraft Company, Vertol Division" and "Boeing Philadelphia". The company was responsible for the design and production of the CH-46 Sea Knight and the CH-47 Chinook. The name became Boeing Helicopters in 1987, and the current name was adopted in 2002.

When Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas in 1997, the former Hughes Helicopters operations in Mesa, Arizona were placed under Boeing Helicopters. A year and a half later Boeing sold the civilian line of helicopters to MD Helicopter Holdings Inc., an indirect subsidiary of the Dutch company, RDM Holding Inc.

By December 2006 Columbia Helicopters of Aurora, Oregon had purchased the Type certificate of the Boeing Vertol 107-II and Boeing Model 234 Commercial Chinook from Boeing. The Columbia Helicopters is seeking FAA issuance of a Production Certificate to produce parts with eventual issuance of a PC to produce aircraft.

Mass transit
For much of the 1970s, Boeing Vertol entered the railroad rolling stock market in an attempt to keep government-funded contracts in the wake of the Vietnam War. During this period, Boeing Vertol manufactured the Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit system for West Virginia University, the 2400 series Chicago 'L' cars for the Chicago Transit Authority, and the US Standard Light Rail Vehicle (marketed as the Boeing LRV). It was the last vehicle, an attempt at a standardized light rail vehicle promoted by the federal Urban Mass Transportation Administration, that led to the company's ending rail production due to myriad problems. This cost Boeing and the vehicle's two buyers, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and San Francisco Municipal Railway millions and led to premature retirement of the vehicles.

While the company's subway cars performed better, they did not continue in the railcar business, as competitors may have underbid on a key contract and the post-Vietnam War military build-up provided far more lucrative military contracts.

Rotorcraft

 * AH-6 Little Bird (acquired when Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas)
 * AH-64 Apache (acquired when Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas)
 * Boeing Model 234 Commercial Chinook
 * Boeing Model 360 (an all-composite, private venture, technology demonstrator)
 * Boeing Vertol 107-II
 * Boeing Vertol XCH-62 (Model 301)
 * Boeing Vertol YUH-61
 * Boeing Vertol CH-46 Sea Knight
 * Boeing CH-47 Chinook
 * Boeing Chinook (UK variants)
 * V-22 Osprey (built as a teaming arrangement with Bell Helicopter Textron)
 * Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche
 * Sikorsky-Boeing SB-1 Defiant
 * Boeing MH-139 (Military variant AW139M to be American-built)

Rail

 * US Standard Light Rail Vehicle (aka the Boeing LRV)
 * Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit
 * Boeing Vertol 2400-series Chicago "L" cars

title: Boeing Rotorcraft Systems


text: Category:1606 births

title: Category:1606 births


text: Category:1607 births

title: Category:1607 births


text: Category:1608 births

title: Category:1608 births


text: Category:1609 births

title: Category:1609 births


text: Category:1610 births

title: Category:1610 births


text: Category:1611 births

title: Category:1611 births


text:
Talk:Weight transfer

{{WikiProject Engineering|imageneeded=yesimagedetails}

Untitled
Should the shifting of weight in the first paragraph be described as "imaginary"? The article implies that the effects are real and recognized by car designers. Is the issue that weight (mass * gravity) is not actually shifted, but the acceleration makes it look like weight is being shifted? Perhaps a better word would be "apparent", "perceived", "so-called", etc? -- Jacius 23:54, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The emphasis of this article is crazy. Weight transfer is far less important than load transfer for most cars and so on. Does the paragraph I added help to explain why? Greglocock 02:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me, also, that "Weight transfer" is not a very good word here. Load transfer might be a better name, with a redirect. That is, the center of gravity doesn't move much. The change in load comes from centrical force or braking or acceleration reaction (inertia). On the other hand, I think "weight transfer" is the common idiom. David R. Ingham 07:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree entirely. None of the hand calculation methods I have seen even considers the change in CG location during a manouevre as being worth calculating. I see no benefit in including an article that perpetuates the problem. If we were to kill this article and make it a redirect to load transfer, explain the problem in terminology there, and then include the bulk of this article in the load transfer article, it would be better. Greglocock 11:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I sort of think "weight transfer" is what people will most easily recognize. "Normal force" might make them try to figure out what an "abnormal" force was. I guess the sense of "weight transfer" must be that the total normal force is still (about) equal to the weight but transfers from wheel to wheel. David R. Ingham 19:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, but if common terminology is WRONG, as it is in this case, surely it would be wise to correct it. FWIW Vehicle Dynamics Engineers may talk loosely about weight transfer, but when we write papers we use load transfer. For instance, here are the headers on SAE's definitions of * transfer

9.5 Tire Load Transfer 9.5.1 TIRE LATERAL LOAD TRANSFER 9.5.2 TIRE LATERAL LOAD TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION 9.5.3 TIRE LONGITUDINAL LOAD TRANSFER

OK, how about we keep weight transfer as the main article, redirect load transfer over here, and then have a para explaining why the common terminology is wrong? Greglocock 21:22, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

The state of this article July 2009
It is wrong abysmal and misleading. I am going to cut all the stuff that is definitely wrong, please consider that the ONLY mechanism by which weight transfer as defined in this article can occur is if masses in the vehicle move with respect to the vehicle. Greglocock (talk) 01:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Moment arm?
Hi, Regular.Stormy, good article. Only thing is I am not quite with you what a 'load transfer moment arm' is (5th para). Do you think you could make that a bit plainer for us simple folk? Thanks. Dieter Simon 00:18, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What should this redistribution of normal force due to inertia be called?
I get about equal numbers of Google hits for "load transfer" and "weight transfer" but the first few for "weight transfer" are about car performance, while the first few for "load transfer" are not. So I suggest that this article be merged with "Weight transfer". We still need to say that the main effect is due to inertia but there is some secondary change in the center of gravity. "Load transfer" sounds a bit as though it meant the cargo (people, lugage and gasoline, in a car) shifting.

Anyway, we should keep trying to make it more quickly understandable to a larger readership because that will save lives. Whatever the effect is called, it does kill a lot of people each year. David R. Ingham 19:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I've always referred to it as weight transfer, and so does every car enthusiast I've talked to. I've never heard of it being referred to as load transfer before. I did a quick google search and dug this page up which could be of some use: http://www.ozebiz.com.au/racetech/theory/wttrans.html Leedeth 12:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

 * These published references all call it load transfer:
 * Tyre and Vehicle Dynamics by Hans B. Pacejka
 * Motorcycle Dynamics by Vittore Cossalter
 * Motorcycle Handling and Chassis Design by Tony Foale
 * In fact, Tony Foale is quite explicite:
 * This is normally referred to as wight transfer, but that is really a misnomer. [long sentence about what weight is] Neither acceleration nor braking can cause this weight to transfer elsewhere. As a result the use of the term 'load transfer' is preferable.
 * Are there definitive references that call it weight transfer? -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Yes, Gillespie 'fundamentals of vehicle dynamics'. He calls it weight transfer, and doesn't mention load transfer. I'd say the obvious difference is that gillespie is a car and truck dynamicist, where load transfer is far more important than weight transfer, but we all call it weight transfer, except for the SAE who are up themselves. I agree it is a misnomer, but wiki should represent the real world usage, not pedanticisms, I'd have thunk. Greglocock (talk) 00:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Imaginary?
Please explain how load transfer is "imaginary". If it were truly imaginary, why is it even worth discussing? As written, I don't think this subject is really separate from weight transfer. At any rate, it's not using the correct terminology to try to distinguish the two and may reflect a lack of understanding on the part of the author. Ham Pastrami 04:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

 * The word "imaginary" has been removed. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal
It appears that the auto industry (with references) uses weight transfer, while the motorcycle industry (with references) uses load transfer to describe the same phenomona: the measurable change of load borne by different wheels during acceleration. For this reason, we propose the intro paragraph should read something like:
 * Weight transfer and load transfer are two expressions used somewhat confusingly to describe two distinct effects: the change in load borne by different wheels of even perfectly rigid vehicles during acceleration, and the change in center of mass (CoM) location relative to the wheels because of suspension complience or cargo shifting or sloshing. In the automobile industry, weight transfer customarily refers to the change in load borne by different wheels during acceleration. This is more properly referred to as load transfer, and that is the expression used in the motorcycle industry, while weight transfer on motorcycles, to a lesser extent on automobiles, and cargo movement on either is due to a change in the CoM location relative to the wheels.

Comments? -Greglocock (talk) and AndrewDressel (talk) 13:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC),

 * Done. -AndrewDressel (talk) 20:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

New Section Edited B Stead (talk) 11:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Example calculation seems incorrect
"Center of mass" section has an example "in a 0.9g turn, a car with a track of 1650 mm and a CoM height of 550 mm will see a load transfer of 30% of the vehicle weight", which according to my calculation is correct, but then it goes on to say this means "the outer wheels will see 30% more load than before, and the inners 30% less". This seems wrong - is 30% of vehicle weight is transferred, this should mean outer wheels (which normally receive 50% of vehicle weight) now receive 50%+30% = 80% of vehicle weight, i.e. 60% more load than before (not 30% as the article claims).

I am however not an expert on the subject and am therefore doubting myself too much to correct the article myself.

Ahtih (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Weight transfer


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rex's copy from second talk page

Mediation requested
Gamaliel, would you accept mediation with me? I believe, based on your overt hostility, that the issue is now ripe. 02:07, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Rex, what do you think the point of mediation would be? My issues are with your accusations, insults, and flagrant disregards for the rules and norms of wikipedia.  Are you willing to change your behavior and act like a rational editor? Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 02:32, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My issue is that you are overtly hostile to me, going out of your way to compound difficulties rather than difuse them. Take a cue from Wolfman. He and I differ greatly, but he is not hostile to me (nor me with him). 03:39, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Obviously we have a very different view of what is going on, as you see yourself as victim and justify your negative behavior on that basis. We can discuss this for years, but nothing will change until the root problem is addressed, and that root problem is your negative behavior. Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 07:08, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)


text: Category:1612 births

title: Category:1612 births


text: Category:1613 births

title: Category:1613 births


text: Category:1614 births

title: Category:1614 births


text:
Talk:Agaricus Blazei Murill Mushroom

I removed the $120 figure and replaced it with "relatively expensive" because it was not clear what quantity of mushrooms the $120 referred to, and there were no comparative figures for what other mushrooms cost. Steve Casburn 23:55, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I believe the $120 refers to one "package" though my guess would be that the number of mushrooms in each package varies. Still, really expensive gets the point across. If you want to revert it or keep it the way it is, it's your decision. freestylefrappe 03:45, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Agaricus Blazei Murill Mushroom


text: Category:1615 births

title: Category:1615 births


text: Category:1616 births

title: Category:1616 births


text: Category:1617 births

title: Category:1617 births


text: Category:1618 births

title: Category:1618 births


text: Category:1619 births

title: Category:1619 births


text: Category:1620 births

title: Category:1620 births