Pls show examples where increasing brightness in post better than increasing ISO.

Started Oct 1, 2013 | Discussions thread
jvkelley Contributing Member • Posts: 849
Re: Pls show examples where increasing brightness in post better than increasing ISO.

bobn2 wrote:

Andre Affleck wrote:

Andre Affleck wrote:

PhilPreston3072 wrote:

With the latest sensors, some have been proclaiming it's better to shoot at base ISO and increase brightness in post rather than increase ISO in camera.

I would like to see some examples of this. Are there any examples where increasing brightness in post delivers better IQ than increasing ISO in camera? And please, disable all NR settings.

bobn wrote here :

So, in the direct route, you would set the maximum exposure (subject to shake and the rest) and then set the brightening to match, whereas the other way you guess at the maximum exposure (via setting a guesstimate on the ISO dial). What most people will do, who don't know that it is exposure which matters, is centre the meter (or let the camera do it) and that will usually result in a lower exposure than had they set the maximum in the first place. No matter how you argue, that is how it really is. People using the ISO first technique will vary rarely set the maximum exposure

Not true, one starts raising ISO when they are already aperture and shutter limited.

Even so, it's unlikely that they will set the maximum exposure, simply because of what people think they have to do, and what they think their priorities. Somehow they will arrive at what they think is the right ISO for shooting, maybe by trial end error as you suggest and possibly just by making a guess, which is the impression that I get from people about setting ISO. You often get statements like '1600 lets me get the shutter speed I need'. Anyhow, however they get there, they now are at the ISO that they want to work. Then they centre the meter (maybe with some EC) to 'nail' the exposure, which means adjusting for some fixed output brightness at that ISO. To do that, they will almost always get a smaller exposure than they need. Supposing they decide that the DOF and motion blur are alright, they'll shoot, even though they might still have been alright up to half a stop more exposure. If they don't think they'll be alright, they'll raise the ISO (usually by a whole stop, I'd guess) and then centre the meter, and the same situation applies. Only when by co-incidence does the maximum exposure that their pictorial constraints allow is the same as the one that centres the meter at that ISO, will they have maximised the exposure, I don't think it often happens.

In any case, even if it does, the rigmarole that they have gone through to get there is a whole lot longer than the simple route, set the aperture and shutter for the largest exposure that your pictorial constraints allow, set the ISO to get the brightness, according to your usual methods for 'nailing the exposure brightness' (mine are do it at my leisure on a nice big computer screen).

I'm having a hard time understanding this argument.  Is the basis of your argument that ISO often increments in whole stops while Shutter and Aperture increment in smaller steps?  So if someone raises their ISO to get a fast enough shutter speed they might be underexposing by up to 2/3 of a stop?

-- hide signature --


 jvkelley's gear list:jvkelley's gear list
Canon PowerShot S50 Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +3 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