• DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    I have strayed off topic from my op by explaining how higher iso causes less noise and not more noise. Higher ISO increases noise visibility - noisiness.

    If anyone would like to discuss in more detail perhaps start a new thread on the relationship between iso and noise.

  • SrMipanorama_fish_eye
    457 posts
    2 years ago

    AFAIK, a higher ISO does not increase noise visibility. It may even decrease it as long as it does not modify exposure.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    If you read back through my posts you will see I was talking about when the exposure* is lowered.

  • WhyNotpanorama_fish_eye
    676 posts
    2 years ago

    You could simplify things by remembering the Sunny 16 Rule from film days for setting exposure SS = 1/ASA( or ISO) with an aperature setting of F/16 …. digital ISO is usually interpreted the same way we did in film days .. And the higher the ASA the larger the film grain! .. usually … I personally return to Freeman or Peterson when I become confused or want to know more about exposure ..

    WhyNot

  • SquadShootershelp_outline
    125 posts
    2 years ago

    Most of this thread is a joke (thanks for the entertainment so far).

    Why explain a concept with a triangle which every child has to learn at school (don’t tell my you forgot about Pythagoras) when you can model it as multiple bidirectional relationships which need to be gobbled together to make sense at all?

    This is a generational issue, not a photographic one.

    Old farts who grew up on film still carry that anxiety with them, and they were so restricted by using film with a set ISO value that they are still jealous about easily bumping up the ADC. As film was not practically exchangeable between each exposure it wasn’t that relevant.

    Young shits couldn’t care less about these facts, and just carelessly move on with their lives while they are happily exposing. They disrespect the previous definitions while inventing new ones which are based on false assumptions, and still need to be ironed out, with an uncertain outcome.

    It’s always two steps forward, one step back (except in photography where you would have an unsharp image with that technique without refocusing).

    So far I’ve seen two arguments basically repeating the same thing over and over again.

    I hope you realize that you are talking about different things: exposure and appropriate exposure.

    And now please don’t let me start to talk about trap rappers exposing themselves.

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    I see Sunny 16 as a guide at best for nice looking sooc jpegs.

    To optimise the exposure ** when shooting raw Sunny 16 will not work.

  • JACShelp_outline
    878 posts
    2 years ago

    Do they actually say that?

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    Many did.

  • doadypanorama_fish_eye
    143 posts
    2 years ago

    I am obviously still a beginner since I have no idea what this thread is about, lol.

  • jm10panorama_fish_eye
    33 posts
    2 years ago

    If Nikon engineers did not grasp these concepts they would not be able to design pretty decent cameras :-)
    There are design engineers and application engineers who wright these wonderful notes. Good application engineers sometimes talk to design engineers. The ones that don't, believe that that understand everything...

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    i like that "exposure and appropriate exposure"

  • SrMipanorama_fish_eye
    457 posts
    2 years ago

    Those articles are typically written by product managers, not by engineers.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    That video does not contradict anything I said in my op 🙂

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    Setting exposure* for nice looking sooc jpegs can be very different to setting exposure* to maximise the quality of the raw data. It all depends on the photographer's needs and aims how they set exposure*

    For me, the appropriate exposure is the optimal exposure**

    * exposure - amount of light striking the sensor per unit area while the shutter is 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.

  • DonaldBpanorama_fish_eye
    2378 posts
    2 years ago

    did anyone say it did ? its just a cool utube, with a wealth of info

  • jm10panorama_fish_eye
    33 posts
    2 years ago

    Not from my experience but does not matter that much. In larger companies that would be technical writers...The point is that it is highly unlikely that the Nikon notes quoted above would meet the approval of the core design group at Nikon that is responsible for producing their cameras. Probably nothing unique here...

  • DanHasLeftForumhelp_outline
    4254 posts
    2 years ago

    You posted the video with a quote from my post so my reply is totally appropriate.

    You had the option to post the video without quoting anyone.

    It seems to me you are scared to start your own threads when you want to go off topic.