You do need to look at the normative references given to interpret this properly.
Why?
Because the normative references tell you how the words should be interpreted. That is why they are there.
First, as I mentioned elsewhere, the reason I posted this first, for the terminology, and second, the concept behind the standard.
One of the issues that constantly comes up, is different people using terms indiscriminately (and I include myself in this). If we're using the same words to mean different things, there's no way we can communicate, let alone reach a consensus.
Hence the normative references.
I think there's also this belief that if you don't understand the equations, you can't understand the implications, and that's not necessarily true,
It's pretty much true. The equations are hardly complex. If you havene't got enough mathematical facility to grasp those, you're not going to understand anything.
which brings us back to the photographic triangle.
I don't need to know what's happening inside my camera to know that the difference between ISO 100 and 200 is one stop of exposure in the final exposure level.
I suspect that you don't know what exposure is. This depends on what you mean by 'final'. Changing the ISO only affects exposure by the mechanism of the exposure meter, it changes the target exposure at which the meter centres.
Knowing that there are three types of adjustment that will affect my exposure level, and that if I change one of them I have to change at least one other, is a valid and useful concept for any photographer, beginner or otherwise.
Where the three are your aperture, exposure time and light incident on your subject - but you didn't mean that, did you? Because you don't know what exposure is - even though the passage from the ISO standard told you. It said "The exposure level of a DSC is determined by the exposure time, the lens aperture, the lens transmittance, the level and spectral distribution of the scene illumination, and the scene reflectance." Notice, no mention of ISO.
The details of how that happens are useful, but not necessary. The number of people who successfully use computers without knowing the difference between a thread and a process is mind-boggling. Most people, if I say "I'd tell you a UDP joke, but I don't know if you'd get it", don't understand why I think it's absolutely hilarious.
You're right that the details are unnecessary. What is necessary though is to understand the basic concepts, like what exposure is.
It doesn't keep them from using the internet, however.
Finally, and I say up front, I have not paid for a copy of ISO 12232.2006 (or .2019),
Well I have, so I have it here.
so what I'm about to say is based on other people's summations-- SOS only applies to sRGB color space images, not RAW, and doesn't apply if multi-zone metering is used.
Wikipedia?
If it's RAW and/or multi-zone metering, then it's the REI, or recommended exposure index, which is up to the manufacturer.
There is no difference in the standard between the requirements for SOS and REI with respect to sRGB. Neither is applicable, stemming from the following passage on the noise based speeds:
The noise of the luminance and colour difference signals shall be determined from CRT display output referred RGB colour signals based on the ITU-R BT.709 RGB primaries and white point, such as the sRGB and sYCC signals defined in IEC 61966-2-1, which are used as output signals in many DSCs.
Whilst the statement is not repeated for the exposure indices, it is clear from the context that it applies also to them, and the 2019 version of the standard stated this more clearly.
There is an additional condition put on REI, as follows:
When the DSC includes a manual exposure mode, or includes an exposure mode using a simple automatic exposure function, then the IREI value is useful. However, when the DSC includes only a sophisticated automatic exposure function, which adjusts the exposure level based on the subject pattern or the absolute luminance range in the scene, the IREI value in not useful and should not be reported.
so the Wikipedia article is wrong on that, and has the condition on evaluative metering precisely back to front. The 2019 standard makes explicit what was obvious all along from how the 2006 version was framed, that all of the ratings apply only to a processed image, not a raw file.
