ISO affects ...
Weird that this site and others talk about "ISO" as if it were a measurable variable complete with units of measure, placing it on a level with the almighty triumvirate of aperture f/number, scene luminance and integration time (shutter period).
At the risk of boring y'all, on one of my cameras, ISO does nothing to the raw at all. Nothing. Zip. Nada.
Did anyone suggest otherwise?
With regards to total light, photons, or, equivalently, lumen seconds (luminous energy). With regards to exposure, photons/area, or, equivalently, lux seconds (luminous energy / area).
So, now it all makes sense to you, right? 😂😂😂
Let's take it down a notch -- more light, less noisy photos. But also, more light, greater amount/risk of blown highlights. Also, to get more light, we have to either use a wider aperture, resulting in a more shallow DOF, a longer exposure time, which increases the risk/amount of motion blur, and/or add in artificial light, which changes the lighting of the scene.
Can't technology and/or software make up for less light? To an extent, yes. I mean, if you're well within the "operating envelope" of a system, then if you're off a stop from the "ideal exposure", it's not going to make that much of a difference. But when you're near the edges of the "operating envelope", being off a stop can be a big deal. So, the more you're near the extremes, the more important this stuff is.
So you are saying that the word exposure in your thread title means the camera settings?
In that case your thread title really means:
in which case most people would probably agree, at least to some extent.
Your answer based on this image 😊
Your descent into abject rudeness means I win as I circle over the charred remains of your biplane ...
Yes, which my thread title is probably a little vague now looking at it 😉
Yes, that is his normal MO when he has backed himself into a corner 🙂
As shown earlier, he has effectively admitted that his thread title really means
... a classic Straw Man attack, drawing attention away from the subject at hand (whatever that was).
In the future people will now know what you really mean when you use the word exposure in your posts.
Mission accomplished 🙂😎
Mods, please delete or move any post or quote that has the stupid video of some guy eating popcorn ...
so now we have "exposure value" "an exposure" "exposure settings" so what is the correct photographic meaning for just exposure ?
Many people like the animated gifs they see in posts when they are aporopriate 🙂
i agree i like the animated posts.
Bob explained very clearly the correct photographic meaning for just "exposure" earlier in this very thread 🙂
He also explained the meaning of "exposure value".
Wear a belt and a little less mousse, maybe? 😆
I determined it using the exposure triangle.
😄😄😄😃😃😃😃😃😃😎
No, those are exposure settings in the camera.
