Adobe editing software the most used in the world for a reason.

Ouch! It just goes to show that what is correct is down to the physics and engineering at work, not down to the authority of the "name" explaining it. Whoever wrote that under Adobe's brand ought to be severely embarrassed.

look lets get this out ,i have studied electronics , radio telecommunications. i can see in a schematic diagram where the transistors, capacitors are to determine what they are doing. its very basic actually. i can remember a poster saying wow how do you fit millions of pots in a sensor LOL you dont cmos operates from 5v to 15 volt ,just control the common collector voltage at the pixel amp simple isnt it. iso doesnt control individual pixels it controls the lot through a common rail. this is very simple explanation but heh it is wah it is.

DonB's quite obvious wind-up behaviour clearly has nothing to do with ignorance and a lot to do with malice. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt a lot (say up to 150 times) but even my most generous spirit can no longer find any excuse for this kind of posting. It's got ridiculous.

Is this not a prime candidate for the mods to practice their new community based mod approach and have a quiet discussion with DonB about the ethos of this site and how we want its members to behave?

But they go further:
"At the heart of it, a thorough understanding of how the parameters of exposure, aperture, and ISO influence light and depth in the image is fundamental to photography. The relationship between these settings and learning how to compensate for changes in one by adjusting another is crucial to achieving the proper exposure.
The exposure triangle is the foundation on which individual creative style and artistic vision evolves. It is the basic alphabet that needs to be mastered before one can create visual poetry."

"@DavidMillier"

When you stop subscription you loose Develop module and Map module. You still can use Library with all your edits and you can print.

I have no reason to believe that is true at all 😉

and what's wrong with that explanation ? how about you re write it and post a more educational piece that gets the message across better to a new photographer. ? teachers are trained professionals . unless you have a double degree in teaching i will take the adobes as being the more suited educational writings. in your explanation you are limited to the same amount of words.

I'm going to assume this was written by a contractor and doesn't represent what Adobe's principal imaging engineers think. Contracting out work to the lowest bidder in an attempt to save money is a plague on society so often in my experience. If you are going to contract out, do it because you need outside experts, not because an accountant says we can reduce inhouse costs!

Well, aside from the technical errors, how about the last sentence? There have been plenty of highly successful artistic photographers whose signature is artistic creativity. They leave the boring stuff like setting the camera to assistants. And there are plenty of unknowns making excellent photographs without the slightest understanding of the technicalities. They may not be making the sharpest, most detailed, and lowest noise images but that doesn't necessarily matter. A good picture can be a good picture despite its technicalities. A technically excellent image with no artistic merit, not so much (not that I am championing not knowing what you are doing - art and craft together is the ideal, but failing that, I'll take the art over the craft).

as my daughter says, anyone can write a science paper in 10,000 words (and trust me she can), now as a teacher write the same topic in 1000 words.

It's not an explanation, and adjusting ISO setting is disconnected from exposure. One can adjust exposure independently of ISO. More, ISO adjustment can happen in a converter or image editor. Some cameras don't even apply ISO setting to raw data.

Correct information is widely available, no need to "re-write" nonsense from some blog.

im not disputing that, especially me. i have a good friend who works for the largest magazines in the world for 35 years .he is regarded as the best in the business and now retired has 4000 students world wide, he couldn't care less about the technical jargon.

ISO is not an exposure parameter*

Richard Butler at dpreview already has posted a much more accurate article and I posted the link to his article earlier.

* exposure - amount of light that struck the sensor per unit area while the shutter was open
** optimal exposure - the maximum exposure* within dof and motion blur requirements without clipping important highlights.
*** under exposed - more exposure* could have been added with the DOF and blur constraints still being met without clipping important highlights.

Here's a simple non-technical question to test your photographer's understanding.

Scenario: A low light situation where you need a fast shutter speed to avoid camera shake and freeze action. You set an appropriate shutter speed and notice that your image is 4 stops underexposed. You are already at maximum aperture. What do you do? You have to decide whether to boost ISO by 4 stops or just accept the underexposure and brighten in post.

Q. What do you think will happen to the resulting image quality in both cases?

does anyone know what the exposure control is used for in ACR 😁 or do you refuse to use it because it has the incorrect meaning !

If I have highlight headroom in the cameras histogram and I cannot increase the exposure* then I would raise ISO to push the histogram data as far to the right as possible without clipping important highlights. This will reduce reduce read noise and then lower the image lightness in post back to what I wanted.

The resultant image will have less visible noise than if I didn't raise ISO and raised the image lightness in post.