OK. Yes, I think we do agree.
The disconnect happened at post #14 where you were talking about the article (which I have not read).
Apparently it relied on the Macbeth chart for out-of-range analysis.
As I've stated repeatedly that's not a proper use of the product.
My concern with the use of 'live' subjects for analysis is lack of consistency. This is why the Macbeeth chart exists.
You can easily shoot a landscape and produce a photo. Try moving that landscape into a studio to shoot under strobes.
This is the purpose of the Macbeth chart. It can be moved inside with minimal effort.
And the Macbeth chart will yield the same results five years from now. I challenge you to guarantee that with any landscape.
I replace my Macbeth chart every ten years, and cannot tell the difference between any of them.