Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Photography
Good looking histograms.....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Blade Canyon" data-source="post: 466237" data-attributes="member: 15302"><p>J-See is obviously famous for his unique stance on "ISO-less" shooting. Thank you for posting that article. I don't think it argues against J-See's method of shooting, however. The value I got from it was how to use the histogram to read the entire dynamic range of a scene. Currently I would do that with spot metering, but the author shows a good example of how to use the histograms from two different exposures. A histogram is obviously important in post processing because it's how we set levels to get the most info in our final shot.</p><p></p><p>I generally agree with J-see on this point: if you need a minimum shutter speed to capture action and prevent blur, and you need a certain aperture to get a proper depth of field, then it doesn't matter where your ISO is set so long as you are shooting in RAW. The sensor will record the exact same amount of light no matter where your ISO is set. Others who have argued against this approach were not leaving the shutter speed and aperture at the same settings. I did my own experiments, and adjusting the ISO in post with a RAW file achieved the exact same result as adjusting ISO before the shot.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, however, there was this very technical article posted by Backdoor Hippie or Horoscope Fish or Hark or one of the regulars:</p><p></p><p></p><p><a href="http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/" target="_blank">theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/</a></p><p></p><p><span style="color: #212124"><span style="font-family: 'Proxima Nova'">And here's the most relevant quotation from that article:</span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: #212124"><span style="font-family: 'Proxima Nova'">"Bottom line: Read noise at high ISO is much smaller than read noise at low ISO, in terms of the error in photon counting that it represents. Thus, better image quality is obtained for using the highest ISO for which the signal is not clipped."</span></span></p><p></p><p>J-see says his experience with newer cameras is different. My experiments show no difference.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blade Canyon, post: 466237, member: 15302"] J-See is obviously famous for his unique stance on "ISO-less" shooting. Thank you for posting that article. I don't think it argues against J-See's method of shooting, however. The value I got from it was how to use the histogram to read the entire dynamic range of a scene. Currently I would do that with spot metering, but the author shows a good example of how to use the histograms from two different exposures. A histogram is obviously important in post processing because it's how we set levels to get the most info in our final shot. I generally agree with J-see on this point: if you need a minimum shutter speed to capture action and prevent blur, and you need a certain aperture to get a proper depth of field, then it doesn't matter where your ISO is set so long as you are shooting in RAW. The sensor will record the exact same amount of light no matter where your ISO is set. Others who have argued against this approach were not leaving the shutter speed and aperture at the same settings. I did my own experiments, and adjusting the ISO in post with a RAW file achieved the exact same result as adjusting ISO before the shot. On the other hand, however, there was this very technical article posted by Backdoor Hippie or Horoscope Fish or Hark or one of the regulars: [URL="http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/"]theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/[/URL] [COLOR=#212124][FONT=Proxima Nova]And here's the most relevant quotation from that article:[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#212124][FONT=Proxima Nova]"Bottom line: Read noise at high ISO is much smaller than read noise at low ISO, in terms of the error in photon counting that it represents. Thus, better image quality is obtained for using the highest ISO for which the signal is not clipped."[/FONT][/COLOR] J-see says his experience with newer cameras is different. My experiments show no difference. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Photography
Good looking histograms.....
Top