Why Exposing to the Right (ETTR) is BAD!

Started Mar 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
schmegg
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,257
Like?
Re: Why Exposing to the Right (ETTR) is BAD!
In reply to Barrie Davis, Apr 1, 2013

Barrie Davis wrote:

schmegg wrote:

Barrie Davis wrote:

schmegg wrote:

Barrie Davis wrote:

mike703 wrote:

apaflo wrote:

Barrie Davis wrote:

What puzzles me (actually, I am completely mystified) is why people seem incapable of associating exposing to the right with the consequent loss of film speed  (using an effectively lower ISO). I have had long ping-pong type exchanges in these forums with posters who just could NOT accept that THAT was what was happened. Quoting the actual shutter speeds and apertures USED at them just didn't help, because they didn't associate THOSE with any particular ISOs, either, it seems.

Why is that, do you think?

Because what you just said doesn't make any sense at all???

Sure it does; it's completely clear.  If you have a scene which averages mid-grey and has a histogram in the middle of the range when correctly exposed, and then you ETTR, you are using a longer exposure to get more light hitting the sensor (as much as you can without clipping highlights) and reduce noise.  Which has exactly the same effect as reducing the ISO.

Quite so.

Sure. That's not exactly what Baz said though.

Yes it is! Mike's was different form of words, to expand the point, but with same meaning.

Furthermore, if you cannot SEE that it is the same meaning, it becomes obvious why there is so much difficulty in your understanding the point itself.

Oh really.

You see to be very sure that your a bit better than me don't you.

The fact remains, if you have the camera set on ISO400, a different gain will be applied to the sensor readout than it will at ISO200. Meaning it's not "exactly the same" at all.

Or do you deny this?

Or maybe it is - but he's too keen to fob me off and say I have no idea rather than try to explain himself better.

I already explained that I have found people who don't understand this extremely basic principle for themselves, tend not to understand even when it IS explained. For this reason I now stop trying at the first sign of dispute.

You say it's "extremely basic" and yet you've been unable to explain it on this occasion, or, by the sounds of it, on many past occasions.

So perhaps it's not a "basic" as you think. Or perhaps you are wrong.

Of course, this doesn't help ME to understand WHY it is that people have so much trouble understanding ... [???]

Perhaps it's because you don't explain yourself! LOL!

And I can't understand why increasing exposure being the same as lowering ISO, which is as blindingly obvious to me as being poked in the eye with a sharp stick, ...

- ("blindingly" ... get it?)-

... should so COMPLETELY pass by the sensibilities of ANYone who claims knowledge of photography, that they actually dispute it even when poked in the eye with that SAME sharp stick.

Amazing!

But, like I say... maybe we will both have to STAY mystified.... [??]

Last night I watched "The Girl Who Played With Fire" in the original Swedish.. It was very good, if a bit violent and gory. In that a guy famously gets tasered in the gonads, and yet doesn't even flinch.

He didn't notice the blindingly (achingly?) obvious, either.

I have no beef with you Baz - nor do I want to start something. I hope that much is clear.

I do find, however, your avoidance of answering my questions and your assertions that I know nothing to be a little ignorant, or at least arrogant. And I'd have hoped I'd have received a little better treatment from someone who has been on these forums for as long as you seem to have been.

I've looked at your gallery and there is some nice and well executed product-style photography there - so I assume that you know a bit about how to take a photo.

As I've asked before, if you shoot at ISO400 but expose for ISO200, then the gain applied to the sensor is different from that which would be applied had the shot been taken at ISO200. And that, in my book, means it's NOT "exactly the same".

It depends a lot on the noise profile of the sensor amplification - and this varies from camera to camera.

You still have not commented on this though - instead you seem to simply imply that I don't know what I'm talking about - which I find to be a cop out and, most likely, an avoiding tactic.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow