ISO 100 IS RUINING YOUR PHOTOGRAPHY
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- Let's talk about the toxic photography habit ruining your photography, its common amongst most photographers, beginners all the way through to seasoned professionals. We've been told this common lie, KEEP YOUR ISO LOW.
Its a lie, most modern day mirrorless cameras are ISO invariant, this means your camera has the great ability to capture sharp images in Low light without too much noise. Of course it depends on which camera you have. This photography killer needs to stop, raise that ISO to ensure you don't get blurry images.
At the same time keep it low,
wait what?
0:00 Intro
0:41 Low ISO
1:18 What iso ISO?
1:48 Excessive Noise
2:17 Changes You Can Make
3:19 Cropping
3:30 Noise Removal Software
4:07 Iso Invariant Camera
ISO Invariant Cameras
www.gypsy-prints.com/blog/iso...
TOPAZ Noise Removal Software
www.topazlabs.com
🥰 Where i Get My Music
ref.audiio.com/7cga3xh8 - Jak na to + styl
Simon d'Entremont once summarized it perfectly: "ISO doesn't cause noise, it only reveals your image was noisy in the first place".
The GOAT
Any image comprises three elements, ISO, shutter speed and f number. Firstly decide how much depth of field you want, that sets the f number. Secondly is the subject at a stand still or moving? If moving do you want to freeze subject and background , or just the subject, that determines the shutter speed. The ISO is then that needed to get a correctly exposed image, digital or on film, whether that be 100 or 250,000 or somthing in between. If you want to set the ISO as the primary then the other two must change to suit the desired effect you want.
it called an f stop, or aperture not f number. i had to stop reading whatever nonsense you said after getting something so damn basic wrong
Big flaw in this solution is that higher ISO doesn't do anything to the light hitting the sensor. All modern cameras, the ISO is after the sensor and is an electronic gain control. With film, to increase the sensitivity, they made the film grains bigger. Bigger grains were more sensitive to light and exposed faster, allowing the photographer to take a picture with less overall light.
Digital sensors accomplish that by amplifying the signal after the sensor. And it is not part of Exposure if you are shooting RAW - which is the answer to the problem that you raise in the video.
You have stumbled into the world of old tech being confused with new tech. ISO settings in cameras have a native ISO where the most dynamic range is achieved by the ISO placing middle grey and in almost all cases there are the same amount of stops above middle grey as below. So if you have 9 stops at native ISO, 4 are allotted to the shadows and 4 above allotted to highlights. When you raise the ISO the middle grey goes down and you then have more stops above ( whilst losing stops below ) so in the sample from the native raising the ISO one stop will give you 5 stops above middle grey and 3 below.
So if you want to shoot low light - the best ISO is low - if you want to shoot clouds with tons of detail - then shoot at at higher ISO.
It is amazing to me how many photographers think that ISO changes the sensitivity of the sensor - ISO is a gain control - you can actually underexpose the sensor, at the same time over expose the photo. Which looks nasty.
again and to emphasize greatly, changing the ISO setting does not change a camera’s or camera sensor’s sensitivity to light. The light sensitivity is a fixed property of the camera and sensor.
Thank you for bringing some common sense and understanding into a topic that has been misunderstood and sensationalized by several channels.
Film isn't any different, it ALSO doesn't change the actual light, or the math/physics of signal to noise. It necessarily increases noise to shoot higher ISO film in less light, because big grains inherently can't capture small details that are smaller than the size of the big grains. It's a very very close analogy. I agree his solution is weird, but I'm not disputing that part. I'm disputing that film is any different. His solution would ALSO be weird for film (in the few instances where it is relevant such as medium format with swappable backs or large format, where you can change ISO shot by dhot)
@@gavinjenkins899 It is different that the word sensitivity in film regarding the ASA is the sensitivity to light and chemical reaction to the actual film. ISO is supposed to emulate that process. The ISO is electronic gain, the noise is there at every ISO - the fact that you can see it with some ISO settings is the difference.
And modern cameras use noise reduction at higher ISO. Everything in front of the sensor is exposure - that was the same in film - ISO , shutter speed, aperture, ND filters and lighting control exposure - ISO doesn't.
It's just a gain stage that gets baked into jpgs in photos.
The noise floor is there though, when you raise the ISO you can just see it easier, but the higher the ISO if it appears clean, there most certainly is noise reduction in play.
@@JimRobinson-colors Whether ISO is "exposure" is a philosophical point, but no matter what opinion someone has on it, I see no valid logic by which they could have a DIFFERENT opinion for film vs. digital. if you want to argue that exposure is just amount of light hitting the image, then fine but that means ISO isn't exposure for either film or digital. If you want to argue that exposure is something about signal:noise or defined in some way with regard to individual data sites, then it would be involved in both film and digital. One or the other, but not a different answer for both.
@@gavinjenkins899 Don't know how old you are - but there was no ISO in the old film cameras - the film canisters loaded into the camera were rated for ASA - which chemically would manipulate the size of the grain and how sensitive the development was to light.
Because it was film and it had to be developed - we didn't have RAW and after you loaded your film into the camera - couldn't change it easily - so exposure was totally different.
Great video. Hopefully it will help some people see the light. Pun intended.
One error though. Turning up the ISO does not increase the sensitivity of the sensor. It does increase the gain, (or strength) of the signal the sensor puts out, but the actual sensitivity stays the same.
Touche
No it isn't.
😂
I just watched a video where the guy used nothing but I also 100 and his pictures were awesome. He mainly compensated with shutter speed
Oh I see he has a picture of the eclipse behind him but he’s talking about general photography never mind
Alternatively, embrace the darkness in low light. Personally I think people focus too much on capturing every little detail and lift the shadows FAR too much. A little drama is good sometimes, if you use it to frame the light well
Full Dynamic Range decreases as ISOs go higher due to that the sensor is increasing the "gain", not sensitivity, a misconception and with that you get grain. Native ISO is where you have your optimum image quality results ONLY if you have proper amount of light in the scene.
100% native iso is what we should aim for, but in some cases you’ll need to up your iso more than that to get proper exposure, especially while capturing movement in low light.
@@lachlangarutti Obviously. So the title of the video is misleading. As with all things photography It is the mindset/skillset of the shooter to recognize when NOT to stay in native ISO, not the fault of the camera.
@@lachlangarutti Only for your jpegs.
Yes, but JPEGs, which are the file format we almost always use to display and share images have something like 9 stops of dynamic range. As long as the dynamic range of your camera sensor is above 9 stops at the ISO you're using (which is roughly ISO 3200 for M43, 6400 for APS-C and 12 800 for full frame) you still have plenty of dynamic range to have a nice looking photo with full colors. Of course, it means you won't be able to recover as much detail from the shadows, but if you're going to such high ISO, how much shadows are you likely to have to brighten up anyway?
@@simval84 Just because we post in Jpeg format doesn't mean we "shoot" in Jpeg format. That's like saying Screw shooting negatives and cut out all creative editing process and go straight to Polaroid print. What people don't get is that with RAW files you can manipulate the dynamic range in that photo and get ANY desired jpeg you want with the allowed maximum tonal depth it will allow, and with native ISO range you are guaranteed all the DR tools you need to make that final Jpeg.
Lower ISOs have wider Dynamic Range for most cameras. Its not just about noise. But to be sure, the propblem is less about using ISO 100...more about too slow shutter speed.
Not a rule. For example the default ISO for Fujifilm X-T4 is about 800. Lower and higher has a less dynamic range.
How to check? Try to shoot a movie in f-log mode and check what ISO camera is selected.
@@user-tr6lg8vw5w he said MOST, not all
Trying to generalize too much on this topic is silly. It just boils down to picking your aperture based on how much depth of field you need (or how little you want), picking your shutter speed based on whether your subject is sitting still or speeding by, and using only as much ISO as you need to expose to the right side of the histogram based on those two choices and available light. That's it. That's all. And it's different for literally every photo.
You're very correct in pointing out, though, that using a low ISO and having to jack up the exposure in post will actually lead to more noise than shooting with a high ISO in the first place. USE enough ISO to get it right IN CAMERA!
There is simply no general answer into this term. It depends ont too many factors, like the used Sensor size, how old the gear is, and of course the light situation, the used lens, aperture, etc. I usually shoot with my gear max. ISO 800, seldom 1600. There's no general rule of thumb into this specific case. And not everyone is using an ISO invariance Sensor, or a A7S I-III series, go figure. 🙂 Coming from Film, max ISO 800 was pretty much standard, and in rare cases pushed to 1600 ISO(ASA).
Yes then adjusting the developing times apropriately
As a new photographer this is great advice. For months I was getting blurry and noisy images and got obsessed with keeping ISO low to combat the issue. Turns out low shutter speeds and shaky hands were the real culprits along with shooting landscapes with a wide open aperture (again to get enough light on the sensor while keeping ISO low). Figure out the right aperture and shutter speed for the image you want then use ISO as the volume knob to get the exposure right
I’m glad it helped! ISO is very misunderstood, it’s nothing to be scared of. 😀
tl;dr: ISO isn’t “ruining” your photos-slow shutter speeds are.
high iso in low light here is the killer ..
I think of it this way: Shutter speed stops motion blur, aperture sets the depth of field I want, and ISO gets adjusted for the correct exposure given with the shutter speed and aperture settings I've selected. That's not exactly scientific, but it gets every shot into the ballpark.
Depending on the style of photos you're taking, auto ISO keeps the picture always bright and tuned but if you want to take moody dark pictures you want the control of the ISO. I like to control everything including ISO, so it depends on how you want to paint the picture.
Thanks Lachlan
Is it the same principle for video?
ISO 100 is great for when you want as close as you can get to perfect technical quality.
Quite the same as when you use the lowest ISO film and you want fine film grain.
Not directly comparable, but you get the idea.
Or you can just say to use the lowest ISO possible for a properly exposed/blur free image. I get what you are doing with the volume analogy but the more accurate analogy is the gain adjustment from an amplifier introducing noise. Volume alone won't really do that if the gain is adjusted properly (if a separate amp is used of course). Well done, thanks for the content.
Good point!
I always use either Aperture priority for DOF control, or Shutter priority for motion. ISO is set to auto with the highest being the highest the images look good when properly exposed. That was ISO 6400 for both my Nikon D800 or D3. Shooting indoors required a f1.4 lens so as to keep the shutter speed at 1/60 or faster. No modern camera really needs to manually control ISO, the images are clean up to at least 6400. Noise on your display does not print out. Too many get hung on noise at 100% or higher. I print 16 x 20" at 10-12MP with ISO 6400 on a semi regular basis. They look awesome at 3 feet or further. I figured out long ago that a properly exposed image looks better than an underexposed image cranked up. A faster shutter speed stops way more blur that trying to keep a lower ISO and slower shutter speed.
Yeh I’ve started using auto iso! Works most of the time!
@@lachlangarutti I set mine to 1/2 stop increases and use EX Comp if I need to adjust more. I picked the d800 and d3 because both can shoot in 5:4 aspect so I can frame perfectly when I take the shot. I also use JPG Fine, RAW is a waste if you expose it properly. The only time I used Manual mode was in my studio where I controlled the light and used a light meter to know the ISO. ( so I could reproduce the same results image after image for that shoot ) It took me 15 years of photography to undo all the misinformation about what gear you need, what ISO, must shoot RAW, etc. Once I started printing myself, I could see how bad the information was. Noise at 200% means nothing to the printed image. I use an EPSON P900 17" wide. Incredible images.
I’m glad I grew into photography through using film. All choices / decisions were a commitment, no delete & reshoot. Film ISO was tied to subject or if you were prepared to do some funky push development. The joy of digital is you can trial and learn, on a static subject. Learn what works, get a feel for the relationship between iso, shutter, aperture and seen light. Avoid rigid thinking. Go play; set up in manual, no metering and play the Sunny-16 rule. You’ll see how fluid photography can be.
Damn! And to think that Kodachrome 25 was my favorite film for decades and I still have thousands of very well exposed slides!. Silly me!
The way I tend to look at it is, your baseline for shutter speed is your camera maximum focus length. If you have a 12-48mm lens, you want to set your shutter speed to 1/60. That is a little faster than your lens which will reduce motion blur. If you are outdoors on a sunny day, set your f-stop to f16. Normally, you'd want your ISO at 50. But you might find that the amount of sunlight is a little low, and that that is not going to line up right for a proper exposure. So you might need to step up to ISO 100. If that doesn't do it, than try 200. Keep upping the ISO until you are perfectly exposed, or just a hair over, and then adjust the shutter speed to match until you have it perfect. In ideal circumstances the shutters speed to ISO speed should look like 1/60 to 50, 1/125 to 100, 1/250 to 200, 1/400 to 400 and so on. The thing to keep in mind is that how much sunlight is available by observation can be a bit of a subjective things. And things I've said are are a good place to start, but may not always line up perfectly. What makes a better photographer is knowing when to tinker a little to get the correct exposure.
I tend to put the iso on auto. Why? If you've ever shot in an environment with ever changing light levels. You will know what a pain it is to keep changing iso. In a forest for instance, you might be going from deep shade to bright sunlight in seconds. Better to adjust the aperture or shutter speed to suit the subject and let the iso take care of its self.
Lightrooms denoise feature is so amazing that even if there is some noise, it does a pretty good job of fixing it (most of the time)
IMHO, It’s a compromise… ISO is amplification of all signal, unlike volume in normal daylight 100-ISO is perfect adequate, in low light it’s a trade off between getting enough light to the sensor vs camera shake vs movement in the image
As a Hobby urban/street photographer my go to settings are Manual mode with Auto ISO so never worry what the ISO is. Very rarely see too much noise.. Thanks for the video, good job
Auto iso is great, I use it for street photography as well!
I use auto ISO for everything, if your camera is from the last 15 years it will get it 9.5/10 times.
I never had an image go wrong with ISO unless I really messed up with my shutter speed.
ISO is a balance between exposure time and quality. All depending on how much light there is.
Quite a few times I have taken higher ISO images, turned them Black and White and bit of slight editing, done. Looks good!
Hell, you always can make the image smaller which will combine pixels raising quality and naturally lowering noise.
I play around with my Canon R8 on Auto iso and am always shocked and surprised to see how high iso the camera chooses... Thanks for sharing 👋
1001th video about this matter ... honestly who is the audience that you're aiming at with this video ? Your channel is obviously for somebody else than me ... but obviously not a bad move ... your only video which exceeded 1k of views (actually 29k at this point now)
I can vouch for this. Many of the newer digital camera sensors are ISO invariant up to quite high numbers. Also, post processing software is very very good. The need to shoot at a low ISO was a necessary compensation for limitations of older technology. Today, it is far less of a concern. Image quality from sensors today is the best it has ever been.
Technology is just getting better and better !
Thanks Lachlan, interesting and helpful video. I don't do post processing and just use jpegs SOOC, so wonder if using noise reduction setting in camera has same effect as post processing regarding the noise reduction. Thanks for your thoughts and sorry if it is a daft question.
Thanks for watching! Using noise reduction in camera won’t be as good as using it in post processing. Although it’s definitely a lot quicker! 😂
Hope that helps!
I shoot almost everything now at 800. I need “sharp” and don’t want the blur of lower isos. Have fun. Good video.
Ditto, 800 is my new magic number, no more blurriness due to silly low shutter speeds, and grain is nowhere to be seen.
What were the iso values of the two globe images?
the other problem is people dont get this concept: noise is not a problem, its the aesthetic of the noise. is the noise pleasing, its like dirt in a higher gain guitar amp signal. its harmonics, it can sound amazing. it can look amazing. a clinical noiseless image, well it may be aesthetically appropriate, but it may not, and noise is not bad. all film had noise back in the day. to one degree or another. its how is the noise. some sensors/color filters produce more or less pleasing noise, before even accounting for simulated noise grain.
On my Sony A7C I just use the minumum shutter speed function and set it to between 1/250 and 1/500 for freezing the motion of my bonkers children and cap the auto ISO to circa 6400.
With that (and the amazing AF), these newer cameras can be so much more hands-off than older cameras like the Canon EOS DSLR sytems.
I have shot comedy gigs since 2006 and have for the past 6 years or so used these methods to reduce noise. Setting the "masking"* to about 80 in LR in the detail panel and the sharpness to about 50 or 60 helps. As does putting colour noise to 50. This works with any sensor size to clean up the noise even before using the new denoise A.I. Also, keep clarity very low no further than 10.
* masking selectively sharpens the details in the image rather at 0 it's sharpening globally which includes the noise.
As someone who does astrophotography, having a low iso is not good. It also depends on your camera if it can handle the amount of iso, like with my canon 7D it’s optimal iso is 800. Anything above that makes the image really noisy.
Noise has become much less of a problem with recent sensor improvements. On my old Nikon D300 the noise begins to get VERY noticeable above 800. Meanwhile, on my Z6ii I can go to maybe 16000 before it reaches a comparable amount of noise. Newer cameras, I've heard, improve on this significantly.
As a Pro for over 35yrs - I have only 2 rules - "F8, be there!" Although I mostly use ISO 64
Interesting when discussing about high iso. It prooves that actually good bodies surely help. Older dslrs like the canon 30d i use cant get over iso 3200, that is also the extended iso. And better bodies also usually offer better iso performance. We need to admit that sometimes the noise generated is too much resulting in a not very nice looking image. Surely noise reduction may help eliminating the noise, but it also takes away some of the sharpness.
I agree though that we shouldnt stick to iso 100 in order to keep the noise low. We shouldnt aim for low noise, but rather, we should keep the noise under control. Meaning we need to know our cameras performance in low light, and know how much noise is acceptable, and what shots are possible with the lens we have, and which are not.
One day I found out for me that I better go with ISO 200 than ISO 50 or 100 having better balance of lights and depths and faster shutter speed. In lower light situations I meanwhile don´t fear to go to ISO levels of up to 6400 on my Sony A7R IV. Just use higher levels if not avoidable at all. In post processing I use Topaz Photo AI and have to say it is definitely worth the money as it carries out little wonders. Too grainy photos with too much noise are magically transformed to photos where it is hard to find noise at all even zooming in. 1 hint from my side is to always use the upscale function in Topaz Photo AI together with de-noise and sharpen as it takes away even more noise and gives more sharpness especially when cropping later. It is real fun with Topaz and it is the second photo software that astonished me a lot straight after Imagenomic Portraiture. I can highly recommend both tools.
On a digital camera, the ISO is simply a measurement of how much your electronic is going to strengthen the signals from the sensor.
If you are planning motorsport you want a low iso and small aperture (large f stop) to get the nice wheel blur though 🤷🏻♂. Photography has no rules. You create an image in your head then use the camera as a tool to achieve your vision..
This thinking is a relic of film days. Lower ISO/ASA film meant finer grain, sharpness, acutance, and color saturation. This information is not particularly relevant to digital, but lots of folk believe it.
100%
But my Fuji has got auto ISO with 3 different, user programmable sets of lowest shutter speed, base ISO and max ISO.
And yes, it's true, too often I chose min shutter speed 1/15s, should better chose a minimum of 1/125 when people are in the picture. 😮😮😮
except when you are trying to convey a sense of motion in your photo, in which case an iso of under 100 is pretty essential... I may have a jillion shutter speeds but my lenses still have the same old apertures....
Awesome video. THanks for sharing. And on a side note, I really was not expecting to see a clip of eSquared showing up in your video. I have followed the ladies for a good long while now.
They do great work, it just matched with the theme of my video.
Congrats on cracking the algorithm!
Thanks 😂
Thank you for your video and explanation Lachlan. I wish you enjoy this phase living in your van in Europe. Brave and free. God bless. I just subscribed to your channel. Keep up the good stuff.
Thank you for watching! We are loving it in a van in Europe, More videos coming soon.. I hope you’ll tune in! Thanks for the very nice comment! 😀
Awesome!! Thank you for your reply.
Newer cameras have built in software to remove noise. As a matter of fact even older DSLRs have NR but most never turn it on.
Someone who got it right ISO does not cause noise lack of light does. Also as someone else said your camera takes the photo then adjusts the exposure in camera not on the sensor.
Good information! Due to the rapid pace of your video (the speed of which I typically like), I had to rewind a few times to understand which image of the two globes you were referring to as you spoke. Maybe label the images with text next time, please?
Thank you! And thanks for the feedback! I’ll have to remember that for my next video! 🙂
It depends on camera: on my Sony a6000 I had ugly noise at all ISO settings, on my Fuji X-T30 noise is much 'nicer' and not as ugly as on Sony even on very high ISO, so I would say: it depends.
But overall, I agree: better to have noisy shot rather than blurry one.
100%
Batch processing a wedding full of high ISO images remains a challenge despite the AI enhancement options. Also, I've seen some pretty wonky AI noise reduction on human faces.
Dear friend, after watching your videos, I nought the pdf and find your simulations super inspiring. In any case, it would tremendously help if for each recipe (in the pdf) you aggregate the kmowledge you transmit on the videos: 1. recommended usage (portrait, landscape, street photography,, etc., 2.), 2. Further technical recommendations as exposure that you mention, 3. More image examples. The one you show are very limited, 4. Installation suggestions for sony (the memory things saved mu day) and 5. Other images. Thanks a lot and keep the good work.
Thanks for the kind message! I’m definitely working on making each video better one step a time! I’ll definitely try and implement your tips! Thanks 🙏🏼
keep going man👍
Newer mirrorless cameras (starting w/ the A7 III and up) w/ the best dynamic range can go full Aperture-Priority, and give you such a good exposure you don't even have to worry about ISO and Shutter Speed.
Paired with today's AI Denoise software from either Lightroom or DXO Photolab 7, even photos with as high as ISO 51,200 are clean and usable.
Interesting video. Shame about the speling misstakes.
How ISO 100 in bright light ruin photography?
I consistently haave photos in the premiere photo shop in my state, and I almost always shoot at ISO 100. Try making a 30x40" print from an image made at high ISO. It doesn't work well at all
@0:28 but again we can break all of these 'rules' according to our creative purposes , right?
I think photography is trial and error, I think it’s a tuning in….
I just tell folks to use as low as an ISO as you can to achieve the results you’re looking for. If 12k is required for those Northern Lights then crank it up!!
Good video, good advice.
100% spot on!
Great Video !!!!
I swear its landscape photographers who perpetuate this, always shooting outdoors!
The noise can be too much, but the opportunity is just once.
100%
Very interesting video. Thank you
RS. Canada
Hope it helps! 😀
CAP! I shoot at the lowest iso because i need to recover all the highlights and shadows and get the least amount of grain. Unless you are using a recent high end camera, that's the way to do it.
I'm not going to shoot iso 800 in daylight with a 1.4 lens.
I never use iso 100 on all my weddings shoot. Atleast iso 320 but almost all indoor I use iso above 1000
You can use low iso if you have 1.2 lens or 1.4 or 1.8 etc in low light , in daylight you can use f/4 its not a problem
I'll 'click' the Like button. Smashing seems overly effusive.
I’ll take it! 😀
Might be great tips. But whenever I'm watching videos with tips on sharpness, settings, image quality and the video is low quality and WB is questionable, I have hard time listening 😅
Thanks for the feedback 👍🏼
I started photographing 4 days ago but i already understood two things:
1.i need to buy tripod
2.Sometimes i just have to turn high iso
Sometimes you just have to! Enjoy learning photography! 😃
@@lachlangarutti thank you, I will!
Meh,
for me, Native ISO64 + good solid tripod + 3sec exposure delay = remarkably sharp and beautiful night photos.
If it works for you then why not! 😀
Maybe, but I don't have iso 50.
Yeah, noise can be fixed. Motion blur not
before anything else you first have to have the money.
cameras from the last 15 years can get the ISO right 9.5/10 times you can set it to auto ISO and be spot-on, what I do is have my ISO and apriture set to auto and manually control my shutter for my moving subjects
Yep i only shoot manual mode when im being a perfectionist
Typo: description not discription. :)
ngl, I thought you were Smarter Every Day for a second
Just did the test and the higher the ISO the higher the noise
When he took the photos of the northern lights, surely that was done on a tripod and with a long exposure time.
Of course it was… with a high iso also.
yeah great 100 years ago they developed something called a tri-pod , try it
“Description “ word is misspelled twice.
There are other spelling mistakes as well. Good thing the video is not on spelling.
Remember low ISO gives the highest dynamic range !!! noob
and it does plummet like a stone with each step up the ISO ladder ... alarmingly so. If I'm shooting something that isn't moving - Lowest ISO and a tripod. Job's a good un.
Do sensors become more sensitive or less sensitive to light? No way, Jose. That is so very far from the truth. You mention volume as an example, which is appropriate. What exactly does an amplifier do? CZcams's weakness is that it contains an abundance of false information. Next, you will discuss compression with greater focal lengths. I did have a nice laugh, however. It may be necessary to conduct further research before sharing inaccurate information.
I use a tripod for most all of my photography so using ISO 100 isn't a problem for me.
Wait so if I have an ISO invariant camera the the rest of what you said in the video doesn't matter?? Lol
This theory might be useful when one's depending on available light, but when you're shooting in a studio with flash heads, this video is completely moot.
ok ill use iso 120
No. My lack of talent at photography is to blame. Not ISO.
Unity gain
I don't think it's helpful at all to say "low light is what actually causes it"... assuming you're trying to get a proper exposure, high ISO ALWAYS means low light from the other two variables, so yes, it causes low light and in turn causes noise. ISO is a noise tradeoff variable, snd needs to be treated as such. You can't just ignore it and always set it last. Sometimes, it might be worth for example sacrificing your artistic vision of a photo with everything in focus to use a wider aperture instead, due to the noise being unacceptably high otherwise. You have to choose based on the situation, any possible simple rule us wrong. If it was that simple, the camera wouldn't even give you a setting for it.
Strange title ....... but I hope you know it is wrong ..... ;-)
I compared two images at ISO 160 vs ISO 1600 - and no visible loss of dynamic range. About the noise thing: I do like noise in my pictures ❤❤❤❤
Why even need a higher ISO? Just get a prime - more light than you need, so you'll have to use ND filters
Try using a tripod and remote shutter cable. Try shooting film and learn that way first. You will have an epiphany when you have low iso only to work with, and to get your results from. Lastly, if 100 iso is wrong, then 64 must be criminal.
Thank you for your suggestions! I appreciate your advice on using a tripod and remote shutter cable. However in photography as you are aware there are many different ways of shooting, the point of this is to not be afraid of lifting your ISO if needed in dark situations with a lot of movement.
@@lachlangarutti yes very true, but what I have found that newbees become very lazy and rely on the camera to help in situations where its not needed. Sports, wildlife being the exceptions. Its a tool as so many others, but it should not become a crutch. Thanks for what you share.
@@cmichaelanthonyimages2197 very good point there!
It really depends on what your are shooting, or what kind of camera / camera sensor you have. This video also assumes that you have a camera with a sufficiently sized sensor. What if you don't?
Talking about noise in a photo. Wtf is noise? It's a photo, there is no audio!
I knew it 😮
Obviously not!
I have no limit on ISO.
Best way to be! 👍🏼