ISO usage poll.

[Gareth Bourne]

How many of you *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting than what would give you the desired brightness of the photo and brighten the photo later in post-processing to taste? I don't mean make adjustments after the fact, but *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting with the intention to brighten later.

For example, let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness. How many intentionally use f/2.8 1/200 at an ISO setting lower than 1600 and then brighten in post processing?

Yes, I do. Generally in situations with lower / variable light (obviously).

99% of the time I shoot in aperture priority, with Easy ISO (that is manual ISO mapped to the rear command dial). I also usually have -0.5 exposure compensation set as I prefer darker / more contrasty images.

I try to keep ISO under 3200, and only very very occasionally use 6400.

If I see my shutter dropping too low for what I'm doing then I'll raise ISO or add more exposure compensation as needed.

Many of the images I took on safari were at -1 EC, and I've rarely added more than +0.5 EV back in Lightroom when editing.

 

[Aaron801]

The poll won't allow me to select two answers. My answer is Never and Always. It depends on the camera I'm using. When I shoot with my Fuji XE-2 I ignore that the camera has an option to change ISO. The camera is set to base and I never change that. As conditions require that I need a faster shutter speed or smaller aperture I set what I need. The XE-2 is, for all practical purposes, completely ISO invariant. So why waste my time twiddling around with something that doesn't matter? Answer = always.

On the other hand when I shoot with my XT-2 I adjust the ISO as needed. The XT-2 isn't at all ISO invariant and adjusting the ISO as needed is a necessary step to reduce noise in the photo. Answer = never.

That seems so odd to me that two cameras of the same make, similar vintage and same sensor size (and I think same x-trans type of sensor) would work so differently. Not that I doubt you but I have to wonder what the thinking may have been with the differnces in design...?

 

[Ysarex]

The poll won't allow me to select two answers. My answer is Never and Always. It depends on the camera I'm using. When I shoot with my Fuji XE-2 I ignore that the camera has an option to change ISO. The camera is set to base and I never change that. As conditions require that I need a faster shutter speed or smaller aperture I set what I need. The XE-2 is, for all practical purposes, completely ISO invariant. So why waste my time twiddling around with something that doesn't matter? Answer = always.

On the other hand when I shoot with my XT-2 I adjust the ISO as needed. The XT-2 isn't at all ISO invariant and adjusting the ISO as needed is a necessary step to reduce noise in the photo. Answer = never.

That seems so odd to me that two cameras of the same make, similar vintage and same sensor size (and I think same x-trans type of sensor) would work so differently. Not that I doubt you but I have to wonder what the thinking may have been with the differnces in design...?

 

[Aaron801]

The poll won't allow me to select two answers. My answer is Never and Always. It depends on the camera I'm using. When I shoot with my Fuji XE-2 I ignore that the camera has an option to change ISO. The camera is set to base and I never change that. As conditions require that I need a faster shutter speed or smaller aperture I set what I need. The XE-2 is, for all practical purposes, completely ISO invariant. So why waste my time twiddling around with something that doesn't matter? Answer = always.

On the other hand when I shoot with my XT-2 I adjust the ISO as needed. The XT-2 isn't at all ISO invariant and adjusting the ISO as needed is a necessary step to reduce noise in the photo. Answer = never.

That seems so odd to me that two cameras of the same make, similar vintage and same sensor size (and I think same x-trans type of sensor) would work so differently. Not that I doubt you but I have to wonder what the thinking may have been with the differnces in design...?

 

[Rick Knepper]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

--
Once you've done fifty, everything else is iffy.

 

[SushiEater]

Since I am shooting with Nikon new cameras that many call isoless I can afford to do it and prefer to do it. In other words I love underexposing thus avoiding hot spots, overblown structures in leaves and flowers....etc...

But many times I also use higher ISO than needed to save on the flash power/battery and get as many pops as needed. 800-1600 ISO all the time on the red carpet unless there is lots of light and even so I would use 400 iso.

--
If I don't respond to your post after you responded to my with NEGATIVE remarks that means you are on my Ignore list.
Photography Director for Whedonopolis.com

 

[Moti]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

He knows it because for a given scene illumination, the above settings would give his photo the desired brightness. How does he know it? Well, they call it photography fundamentals.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

There is nothing wrong with this way. I just think that a skilled and experienced photographer, who knows what he is doing, would be able to nail the exposure on the money without having to bracket. So there is still a way to go.

--
Once you've done fifty, everything else is iffy.

Moti

--
http://www.musicalpix.com

 

[Christof21]

How many of you *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting than what would give you the desired brightness of the photo and brighten the photo later in post-processing to taste? I don't mean make adjustments after the fact, but *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting with the intention to brighten later.

For example, let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness. How many intentionally use f/2.8 1/200 at an ISO setting lower than 1600 and then brighten in post processing?

Hi,

I may use a lower ISO setting to preserve highlights.

There may be a good reason to use a lower setting, so I don't see what you can conclude with your poll.

 

[Rick Knepper]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

He knows it because for a given scene illumination, the above settings would give his photo the desired brightness. How does he know it? Well, they call it photography fundamentals.

I am all ears.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

There is nothing wrong with this way. I just think that a skilled and experienced photographer, who knows what he is doing, would be able to nail the exposure on the money without having to bracket. So there is still a way to go.

Again, I am all ears.

 

[Great Bustard]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Me? Well, I'm typically shooting in Av Mode, often, but not always, with Auto ISO. So, let's say I'm at f/2.8 (which, incidentally, is typically well stopped down for me ;-) ) ISO 1600 and the camera meters for 1/200. That's how I'd know.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Since I shoot Canon, I typically like to get the brightness to taste in camera. The exception being when I'm using Auto ISO and the camera chooses differently than I'd have chosen and there isn't time to adjust.

 

[tony field]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Although "desired brightness" is not really defined .... you have to interpret what it means. Is this the brightness of the camera jpg or is it the the brightness after raw conversion or after post processing.

If you have set your proper exposure for the shot, the desired brightness of the recorded image is what ever the proper exposure delivers. The exposure could have been specifically in the ETTR style, or any other exposure requirement. This IMHO has everything to do with how your process in raw conversion or in post processing.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Nothing wrong with bracketing ... it is a reasonable (particularly for jpg shooting) and lazy way to protect the exposure quality if bracketing is an option for the shot (in my case, bracketing is seldom practical for my chosen subjects). The coarseness of the bracketing is sometimes difficult to choose.

--
Charles Darwin: "ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
tony
http://www.tphoto.ca

 

[riveredger]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Me? Well, I'm typically shooting in Av Mode, often, but not always, with Auto ISO. So, let's say I'm at f/2.8 (which, incidentally, is typically well stopped down for me ;-) ) ISO 1600 and the camera meters for 1/200. That's how I'd know.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Since I shoot Canon, I typically like to get the brightness to taste in camera. The exception being when I'm using Auto ISO and the camera chooses differently than I'd have chosen and there isn't time to adjust.

If you are shooting in aperture priority mode, the only way you will change the brightness of a given image is using exposure comp. Since you are shooting in Av mode, the camera will change the shutter speed as you change the ISO in order to maintain the "right" brightness as determined by the meter.

 

[Rick Knepper]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Me? Well, I'm typically shooting in Av Mode, often, but not always, with Auto ISO. So, let's say I'm at f/2.8 (which, incidentally, is typically well stopped down for me ;-) ) ISO 1600 and the camera meters for 1/200. That's how I'd know.

I thought for a moment you knew all three parameters before you took the shot.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Since I shoot Canon, I typically like to get the brightness to taste in camera. The exception being when I'm using Auto ISO and the camera chooses differently than I'd have chosen and there isn't time to adjust.

Got it.

 

[Bill Ferris]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

He knows it because for a given scene illumination, the above settings would give his photo the desired brightness. How does he know it? Well, they call it photography fundamentals.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

There is nothing wrong with this way. I just think that a skilled and experienced photographer, who knows what he is doing, would be able to nail the exposure on the money without having to bracket. So there is still a way to go.

Bracketing is a technique a skilled, experienced photographer will use to nail exposure. For example when shooting landscapes in a high dynamic range light environment in full manual near base ISO, select the f-stop to achieve the desired depth of field, choose a shutter speed to nail the exposure for the sky (or the brightest element of the scene) and a bracketing interval that will produce another image in the set with exposure nailed for the balance of the scene. When photographing a more complex scene (water, sky and terra - each with significantly different luminance levels), you might need a 3-4 exposure set to nail exposure for all elements within the scene.

It's also insurance against errors, which everyone makes from time-to-time...better to come home with the shot than with pride in tact

 

[Moti]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

He knows it because for a given scene illumination, the above settings would give his photo the desired brightness. How does he know it? Well, they call it photography fundamentals.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

There is nothing wrong with this way. I just think that a skilled and experienced photographer, who knows what he is doing, would be able to nail the exposure on the money without having to bracket. So there is still a way to go.

Bracketing is a technique a skilled, experienced photographer will use to nail exposure.

That depends what the purpose of the bracketing is. If it is to for producing HDR image, then bracketing with different exposure levels is necessary. However if a photographer shoots several images with different exposure levels just to select the best from the series, Well, As I said above, there is nothing wrong with it but it is a bit the lazy way to get the exposure right.

For example when shooting landscapes in a high dynamic range light environment in full manual near base ISO, select the f-stop to achieve the desired depth of field, choose a shutter speed to nail the exposure for the sky (or the brightest element of the scene) and a bracketing interval that will produce another image in the set with exposure nailed for the balance of the scene. When photographing a more complex scene (water, sky and terra - each with significantly different luminance levels), you might need a 3-4 exposure set to nail exposure for all elements within the scene.

That is true but what you are describing here is an HDR workflow. Shooting 3-4 images with different exposure levels of a complex scene will not nail the exposure for all elements unless you combine the shots into one tone mapped image because each individual image of the set will be a compromise.

It's also insurance against errors, which everyone makes from time-to-time...better to come home with the shot than with pride in tact

Yes I agree although this is less crucial,If you shoot raw because then you have a greater latitude to make corrections in post.

Moti

--
http://www.musicalpix.com

 

[Great Bustard]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Me? Well, I'm typically shooting in Av Mode, often, but not always, with Auto ISO. So, let's say I'm at f/2.8 (which, incidentally, is typically well stopped down for me ;-) ) ISO 1600 and the camera meters for 1/200. That's how I'd know.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Since I shoot Canon, I typically like to get the brightness to taste in camera. The exception being when I'm using Auto ISO and the camera chooses differently than I'd have chosen and there isn't time to adjust.

If you are shooting in aperture priority mode, the only way you will change the brightness of a given image is using exposure comp. Since you are shooting in Av mode, the camera will change the shutter speed as you change the ISO in order to maintain the "right" brightness as determined by the meter.

Yep.

 

[Great Bustard]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Me? Well, I'm typically shooting in Av Mode, often, but not always, with Auto ISO. So, let's say I'm at f/2.8 (which, incidentally, is typically well stopped down for me ;-) ) ISO 1600 and the camera meters for 1/200. That's how I'd know.

I thought for a moment you knew all three parameters before you took the shot.

Do I strike you as someone with that level of talent? Next thing I know, you'll think I use manual focus. ;-)

More seriously, I do practice both on occasion. But let's just say I trust the camera more than I trust myself.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Since I shoot Canon, I typically like to get the brightness to taste in camera. The exception being when I'm using Auto ISO and the camera chooses differently than I'd have chosen and there isn't time to adjust.

Got it.

I'm glad I was able to explain it well. I was thinking I'd flub up the explanation and cause even more confusion!

 

[Rick Knepper]

Snip ridiculous backtracking, flip-flopping.

Moti

Thanks for saving me trouble of proving you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Rick Knepper]

let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness.

How would you know this?

Although "desired brightness" is not really defined .... you have to interpret what it means. Is this the brightness of the camera jpg or is it the the brightness after raw conversion or after post processing.

Precisely, although this IS the Great Bustard and I thought for a brief moment that Joe could ascertain those shot settings by simply looking at the scene. Maybe it was in the way he worded the premise or his reputation preceding him.

If you have set your proper exposure for the shot, the desired brightness of the recorded image is what ever the proper exposure delivers. The exposure could have been specifically in the ETTR style, or any other exposure requirement. This IMHO has everything to do with how your process in raw conversion or in post processing.

I use ISO 100-400 and the aperture for the desired DoF, bracket, and take what the camera gives back. I assume the shutter speed sets the final exposure. Depending on which image out of the set I pick, I may have to brighten or darken more when I process..

Nothing wrong with bracketing ... it is a reasonable (particularly for jpg shooting) and lazy way to protect the exposure quality if bracketing is an option for the shot (in my case, bracketing is seldom practical for my chosen subjects).

There is always a number of ways one can look at things. I think bracketing is the opposite of lazy. That's five times (or whatever the number is) the number of images one has to view in post processing.

One of base advantages of digital is unlimited shooting without a per shot cost. Not taking advantage of this benefit seems a waste to me.

The coarseness of the bracketing is sometimes difficult to choose.

Well.. I shoot 5 image brackets at 1/3 stop increments. When folks talk about 6 stop shadow lifts and huge recovery benefits of RAW, a 1/3 stop seems like a fine tooth comb. My gut tells me that 99.9% of RAW shooters aren't really conscious of exact exposures because they know they have a lot of leeway in post processing.

 

[Christof21]

How many of you *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting than what would give you the desired brightness of the photo and brighten the photo later in post-processing to taste? I don't mean make adjustments after the fact, but *intentionally* use a lower ISO setting with the intention to brighten later.

For example, let's say f/2.8 1/200 ISO 1600 would give the photo the desired brightness. How many intentionally use f/2.8 1/200 at an ISO setting lower than 1600 and then brighten in post processing?

Still a mystery what you wanted to proove with this post.

It would have been more interesting to ask for the reasons people may underexpose I think there may be bad reasons (could be useless or even worse) but also good reasons ( preserving highlights).

Doing this poll without asking for the reasons does not make sense in my opinion.