Talk:Foot-candle

message: how much light in terms of watts is 1 candle-power or how can i relate to a candle-power —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.2.154  (talk • contribs)  17:39, 28 December 2004 
-- watts is a measure of power, candles are a measure of intensity (power/ unit area) 
The intensity will diminish as you move away from the light source . The rule is
:Intensity = Power/area
and, since area of a sphere is 4 pi R^2, whre R is the distanee from the source
:Intensity = Power/(4 pi R^2)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.86.230.254 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 17 October 2005 
----
It is incorrect to say that lux and EV measure the same thing. Lux is a measurement of luminous flux hitting an area, and as such has a time component. EVs are a measure of the luminous flux hitting an area per second. The two measurements are not equivilent and therefore it is not possible to convert between then.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.50.201 (talk • contribs)  09:42, 3 September 2006 
:I deleted that from the article. At the least, a relation between illuminance and EV will be valid for only one particular film speed. From the EV article, EV seems more directly related to the luminance received at the camera than to the illuminance of the scene. These quantities are of course related, but are not equivalent.--Srleffler (talk) 02:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  candle-power to watts 

message: At the bottom of the introductory section of this article, it says:
::Each f-stop has an approximate corresponding foot-candle reading (see the table below).
I don't see any such table, though.  Did this accidentally get deleted?  Was it ever there?  Is it in a referenced article?  Other?
I don't know where this table might be sourced, so I'm asking for someone to fill it in.  Thanks!
Lindes (talk) 21:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I took it out; it's obvious enough that a light meter can be used to measure illuminance, but beyond that it was uninformative; with a source, perhaps it could be turned into something useful. Dicklyon (talk) 22:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  calculating foot-candles with a camera 

message: "A footcandle (sometimes incorrectly listed as 'foot-candle' or 'foot candle'; abbreviated fc, lm/ft², or sometimes ft-c) [...]"
OK, I'll bite.  If it's incorrect, why's the article at foot-candle, and not footcandle?  84.203.35.116 (talk) 07:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect title? 

message: This image is placed in the article such that it looks like it should be relevant to the definition of foot-candle. I think a diagram would be best, but even an image of a typical candle would be better because it wouldn't undermine the actual notion this article is about. Jbeyerl (talk) 20:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's relevant – as a play on words by a company in the business.  Dicklyon (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

text: I agree with both of you- it's relevant because it's a play on works from a company that has been in the business- however I have thought this image was weird for as many times as I've looked at this article too, and I'm thinking that it shouldn't be the key/main/first image of the article. --Chonolith (talk) 03:00, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate image