Guess the Format

[Black Pearl]

Just a bit of fun and nothing else.

I gave up at 125 shots and 66% hit rate: http://guesstheformat.com/photo

At web sizes you're just guessing unless its a compact but worth a few minutes and a giggle.

[Donald]

I just kept hovering around 50%.

[Downrigger]

I dropped down to 36% and the quit after I drifted back up and reclaimed 50%, all the time wondering: why did I make a such big deal about getting a full frame to support my interest in improving at this (for me) hobby?

[tao2]

Got bored at 90 (47%). Hardly looked at any of the images. Only chose compact or APS-C never chose full-frame or four thirds . Proves that an infinite number of monkeys...

[RustBeltRaw]

Scored 77% after 30 shots.

I got that not by minutely examining image quality, but by thinking about the situations each photo was taken in, and looking for evidence of the type of photographer. Anything which looks unprocessed is probably compact or APS-C. Street work has increased odds of being MFT. Snapshots are probably compact. Shots which clearly required some planning were probably put together by people likely to own full frame cameras. Anything with tight DoF is likely full frame or APS-C. Telephoto work is probably APS-C, maybe full frame. Macro work is almost certainly APS-C.

More to do with the situation and the type of person who probably took the shot than the pixel-level details.

[DanK]

Bottom line seems simple to me:

1. Most of the improvements one gets from a large sensor don't survive when you reduce an image to a small, low-resolution image. This shouldn't be surprising, but on other sites, I see people frequently insisting otherwise. In fact, one today: someone who wrote that as soon as you see the images from a 5D (classic, first generation no less) on sreen, the improvements compared to a crop are obvious.

2. Comparisons like this aren't very useful because they confound other characteristics of the images with format. The better way to do it would be to produce the same image twice, with two different sensors. I actually thought about doing that with my crop and FF cameras, just to have something to show the people who insist that there is a magical difference between the two, but I have been too lazy to do it right.

[chauncey]

wondering: why did I make a such big deal about getting a full frame to support my interest in improving at this (for me) hobby?

Basing camera choice on internet imagery is not a wise choice, witness our scores.

[inkista]

Did 100, and was coasting along at 69% but goofed a few at the end and wound up at 66%. Much like Lex, I picked up on a lot of cues that weren't image quality-related. Full-frame was the easiest for me to discern by "look": DoF, tonality, composition, and perspective/distortion [i.e., glass choices]. Four-thirds I also used the "If it's street" factor+ "is it 4:3?" as well as the character of the tonality (hard to describe, but m4/3 vs. FF is like crunchy vs. smooth peanut butter to me). APS-C I also picked up on the bad technique/processing likelihood, but a bit later than I should have, and that's where I guessed wrong the most. And compact, obviously can fool you because a lot of the compacts in the mix were enthusiast cameras like the X10 and G15, which can look an awful lot like larger formats at smaller apertures.

Fun!