Exposure triangle explanation please.

Started Jul 9, 2013 | Questions thread
texinwien Veteran Member • Posts: 3,326
Re: Not exactly

JTC111 wrote:

I think you've boxed yourself into a ridiculous argument and now you're committed to trying to win it through some silly semantics game.

No, my argument is pure physics. Whether I state it clearly enough or not, it is correct. The physics are on my side. Whether you understand it or not, it is correct, and will always be so, because it is based purely on physics, like it or not.

With this in mind, I suggest that you try to understand why it is correct, rather than fight against it. Your call. I'm trying to be helpful.

texinwien wrote:

JTC111 wrote:

texinwien wrote:

I predict that ISO will mostly go away within a decade. For some of us, it already has. I, for instance, have a mostly ISO-less camera. I shoot RAW and almost always at base ISO, then apply the appropriate amount of gain in my post-processing step.

You're defeating your own argument.

I'm not. I'm being honest here. My camera is barely ISOful. It makes sense for me to use ISO 200 and ISO 400. My camera goes to ISO 28,800.

A "mostly ISO-less camera" is an ISO camera.

No, there is a difference between a truly ISOful camera and a mostly ISOless camera. The important thing, however, is that more and more cameras are truly ISOless, and my argument is that when all cameras are truly ISOless, it will no longer make sense to talk about ISO.

This is like that old adage about how you can't be a little bit pregnant. A camera either lacks the ability to adjust ISO or it doesn't. This nonsense about "mostly" ISO-less is a semantic invention you've come up with. It's rubbish.

Adjusting ISO has nothing to do with whether a camera is ISOless or not. Now I understand your confusion. I suggest that you read up on the topic of ISOless cameras. It's a real thing, not something I made up, and it has nothing at all to do with whether a camera has an ISO setting that's adjustable.

You shoot "almost always at base ISO..." Both of those statements indicate that you, like most everyone else that has a good working knowledge of photography, adjusts their ISO when necessary. Like you, I like to keep my ISO at the base number, 100 in my case. I only increase it if the amount of available light is insufficient for me to get the shot I want. I don't know anybody who has a preference for a high ISO setting if a lower one is up to the task at hand.

No, you're off here. I use three ISO settings on my camera. I use ISO 200 in abundant light and ISO 400 or 800 in lower light. This means, in lower light, that I end up with underexposed images that I have to brighten in post processing. Basically, my camera is ISOful at ISO 200, 400 and ISO 800 and is ISOless above that.

I do not use ISO like you do most likely. My camera goes to ISO 28,800. Because my camera is ISOless above ISO 800, though, I ignore all of those higher ISOs and often end up with 'underexposed' images to which I must apply gain in post processing.

Now here you are contradicting your previous statements. You say you use ISO 100, 200, 400, and 800. Why do you use 800 on occasion? That's a rhetorical question; we both know why. You use it because without its availability, you wouldn't be able to get the shot you want the way you want it.

No, that is not correct. Again, please do some research on the topic of ISOless sensors. Your knowledge of the subject is too basic to step into this conversation at this level. Your lack of knowledge is making it impossible for you to make any progress here.

ISO has been a factor in photography for a long time. The nice thing about ISO on a DSLR is that we no longer have to make a commitment to a particular ISO for 36 shots. But without the ability to adjust ISO, there are many pictures for which we'd have to sacrifice artistic sensibilities or we wouldn't be able to take at all.

The last sentence is wrong. On an ISOless sensor, you can leave the sensor on base ISO ALWAYS and apply gain in post processing, if you're shooting RAW.

Eventually, this is how cameras will work - they will be completely ISOless, the ISO setting will go away, and you will be able to apply appropriate gain after you've taken the photo, allowing you to focus only on shutter speed and aperture.

If I can't adjust ISO on the camera, I can't always get the shot I want how I want it. I adjust my ISO upwards from 100 for the same reasons you do. It that adjustment isn't available, we don't get the picture. It's that simple. Stop trying to be clever.

On an ISOless camera, adjusting the ISO will not help you at all. This is not being clever, it is telling you the truth. You may have an ISOless camera with ISO settings from 200-25,600. If the camera is truly ISOless, you nothing by using any ISO other than the base.

Honestly, this is the truth. It's not me being clever. Your failure to understand is yet more proof that the concept of ISO is confusing and not well understood by far too many photographers.

And I'm not saying that to be mean - I used to be in the same camp.

 texinwien's gear list:texinwien's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 OnePlus One Canon EOS 300D +20 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow