Speaking of organic noise from digital cameras, I was blown away when I learned that The Holdovers was shot digitally. Apparently, they shot the Alexa at 1280 ISO to add natural texture in camera, before hitting it with heavy film emulation in post (with added grain/halation/gate weave). I was pretty much convinced that it was shot on specially made film stocks from the 70s, but it wasn't!
I did the same thing with a short I shot on the Mini LF. I pushed it to 1600. It’s Black & White, super high contrast. The noise pattern looks great. 3200 on the Mini LF looks like 16mm
I can think of two additional reasons as to why you want noise added back to your image 1. It reduces H.264 compression artifacts in places that have gradients, for example the wall in your left(screen right),. 2. It reduces stepping in color gradients that occur when your high bitrate image gets inevitably crushed to 8-bit, causing color steps to become more visible. DIgital video only looks clean when the bitrate is absurdly high.
This is crazy. I’ve refused to watch this video for a few weeks now but I thought for sure this was clickbait. But you’re right, I’ve actually been doing this wrong 😂😂😂 thanks
The bit about 'gain' you moved through quite quickly is actually critical as it explains much more literally what's happening at the sensor level. This is because each camera actually only has one ISO rating, you mention it as the 'base' iso, anything above or below that is gain added to the sensor signal /after/ the photo diode well, so it doesn't actually make the sensor more sensitive to light. It just takes that same sensor signal and add signal gain down the image pipeline. Think of it like gain in audio. This is why the 'rated' iso for a camera system often has an equal distribution of usable stops above below the 0EV line, and 'iso' ratings above and below that native sensitivity don't incrase the total amount of usable stops (which WOULD be an increase in sensitivity) but instead just shift where those stops of range are assigned, giving you more available stops in the highlights or more in the shadows, but not both. This is just like adding 'gain' in audio (or in colour finishing for that matter). You can't add gain to find sound that wasn't sensed in the first place by the recorder, you can only move the whole measurement up (and the noise floor with it), same thing with light. The reality is that our hardware digital sensors can actually record way more light than a single ADC can capture and convert into signal, that's why ARRI run dual 14bit ADCs, to increase the range of signal the recorded file is able to hold at any one time without clipping off the top/bottom values.
while i do agree with most of your points, I do want to point out certain architectures like the Exmor in the Sony Venice line do have two sets of metal wirings for each of its native EI, which effectively shifts the curve at no cost to signal to noise ratio. This leads to my disagreement with your approach of the information, because I don't think it is necessary to go into electrical engineering under a video that is meant for general consumption. there is an old training video for engineer students where the presenter is just saying technical sounding nonsense and is expecting the audience to follow. sure, what you are saying might sound sane to your peers, but that belongs in a white paper, not in an educational youtube video.
Different gain circuits certainly do give the camera a second or even third base ‘rating’, not to mention DGO sensors like the Alexa ALEV mentioned. My comment was more trying to cover the fundamental idea of what iso adjustments are actually doing (adding or subtracting signal gain to a given base sensitivity). In terms of the information though, you’d be surprised. This isn’t exactly a complicated part of image sensor technology nor is this a general audience. The information in technology white papers are exactly what Directors of Photography want to know so that they are informed about what they’re actually operating with, rather than get misled by clever marketing. It’s certainly not just something relevant only to engineers.
I shot a video about this exact same topic that I just haven't got around to finishing. What you're talking about here is SO crucial for run and gun type filmmakers and I'm not sure why it's not talked about more on CZcams. This adds to a handful of videos I've seen discussing it. CZcamsrs always say shoot everything at the camera's native ISO for the 'most dynamic range' and that is just so wrong. I would have saved myself a ton of unuseable footage if I had just known this earlier. I shot a short documentary last year and I got some of my best looking footage ever. Deep shadows with Zero noise. Completely blew my mind
Great video Mitchell! More and more I find I'm having to rework my mind when it comes to how I should observe/handle ISO. This is not only a great reminder but an addition to how I think I'll view ISO moving forward. Grain can be good!
best iso video ive ever seen! You got a follower more! Now i finallyy understand iso... photography (and hopefully cinematocgraphy in the future) will step up now. Thanks man!
All this information is correct. Nice work. ISO is not about how good or bad a camera is … it’s about how good or bad a cinematographer is. The original ARRI Alexa at HD is still the best image for that film look.
I was expecting the usual 'the right iso' video, but instead you got a new subscriber! Very well put I would say! I would also add that there's also people shooting things outside of well lit sets, I find myself very often shooting wildlife, so very long zooms, high F stops, on a Micro 4/3 sensor because of the reach and the convenience, most likely while being in a dark forest 😅. I have to use different shutter speeds and iso than the 'correct' ones because otherwise it would be better if I stayed at home 😂
Bro, holy shit! I've been taking pictures for a year with always 200 ISO. Just tried this on my GX80 and my images are not only more sharp but has a little more life. Thank you so much!
I agree with the concept of adding noise but you explained the exposure physics right. I'm a computer engineer, it's more technical. The ISO is how you set the range of the data captured by the bit depth of the camera, for example 8-bit, 10-bit, HLG, SLog3, etc. When you are adjusting the gain, you are setting the minimum and maximum range of the light you're capturing, which you can refer to as clipping the light on the sensor and normalizing (i.e. setting from 0-100%) to the bit depth. You have have heard the terms Expose to the Left/for the shadows, and Expose to the Right/for the highlights, and expose for the center/shadow and highlights. The light that is coming in is in a certain number range, and you need to scale that range so that you capture the dynamic range that you need. You do this with a histogram. You will see in the histogram that the light coming in at the different frequency ranges, and you need to get all of the information into the histogram that you want to capture. You can adjust your exposure compensation, and this will shift the light pixel data to the left or right of the histogram, hence the name expose to the left or right. If you are using 8-bit SLog3 in sunlight, you will either have to expose to the left or right with SLog3, or turn of log and expose to the center, but you will not be able to recover shadows or highlights. You are using the gain to set the range of the 8-bit and 10-bit color data, which means each pixel is either 24-bits (8-bits times 3) or 30-bits (10 bits times 3), but they pack that up in YUV format to get 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 subsampling, which is confusing, to do the Hybrid Log Gamma and SLog2/SLog3/CLog/FLog/etc All of them are variations on HLG, which is part of the HDMI standard but none of the other brands log curves are HDMI standards.
Hi, Cale, can I bother you with a technical question given that you seem to know about this stuff? Do histograms we see in the camera display the RAW data (the RAW histogram?) or the histogram of a JPEG? Once we get to processing software, does that change?
@@davidturner5 I would assume it's coming in raw. The white balance only adds and subtracts rbg values (usually HSV to RGB but Mokose uses RGB). The sensor is RGB, and the value is 0 to 100%.
@@CaleMcCollough Groovy, thanks. As I recall, the image on the back of the camera is a JPG, which makes sense given that RAW data can't be displayed "raw" and *some* sort of display/output decisions must be made in order to show it there. I suppose I wondered whether the histogram reflected that in-camera JPG conversion, but I can see now where my intuitions might have misled me.
Noise used to be a huge problem back when cameras were mostly using compressed codecs. But now with less compression and even raw internally in some hybrid cameras now I don't think it's as much of an issue.
Nice video man😃I have the fx30 with dual iso and “should” I still use the higher base ISO for outdoor and vice versa or does it not matter if they have 6 stops each direction either way? Also would’ve been cool to see the last clip you were talking about🙂
With Sony cameras in EI mode ,EI ( exposure index ) its not ISO , your recording will always be in one of the two base ISO,s. EI is just like rating a film stock different than whats on the can , that is setting a light meter to 250 ISO on 500ISO rate film stock . Sony EI works like this too. If your base ISO is set to 800 , and you set the EI to 400, viewing with a MLUT , your image will get 1 stop darker from the correct exposure , so add light or open up 1 stop, you are intentionally setting a uniformed 1 stop over exposure off set , because your recorded image will still be 800ISO, and will look stop over exposed in Slog play back. So it's a bit tricky and counter intuitive , raise the EI , and you will get way under exposed recorded footage . Viewing without a LUT you will see no change in the image at all ,changing the EI.
this was an amazing video, my R6 has amazing dynamic range so I can shoot at 10000 ISO and theres only a little bit of grain. I did not know about shooting high iso in sunlight to get better highlights, thank you so much!
I really enjoyed this video. As a Videgrapher I’m trying to level myself up and just purchased the FX3. I’m really obsessed with light and how that plays an integral role in my story telling. I did this after my CZcams video colours and lighting were just waaaay off. I’ve been practicing and this knowledge you shared helped someone like me more than you know. It might be common knowledge but that you. I had no idea.
I just got an FX3 myself . Am I crazy but the HD in this camera really rocks I can blow it up 200% and the eyes and face in the picture are still crisp and in focus 😮. I’m finding using the base ISO is not always the best option.
@@wotiluv really funny you say that! I am working on a video and I was saying out load how insane the zoom capabilities are! Ill upload it around tomorrow so stay on the look out. See if you can pick out the really zoomed shots. I was astonished! But I did that at 4k. I am really happy with this camera. I love it soooo sooo much!
When I color for people, I often get questions of whether they should target a certain ISO and over/under exposure level. I've simplified it to "your camera has one ISO its always recording at no matter the setting (or two if its dual native) and one white balance. Everything other ISO is a level on the volume nob. If it's not well exposed at native, it's not well exposed at all."
@@Lathrop_Media what do you mean? Outside of native ADC reading, everything else is gain functions. Even internally, the camera will just perform analog or digital gains on the sensor info when shifting ISOs or white balance. Peak pixel well saturation is fixed and sensor read noise level is fixed, so your floor and ceiling is static, assuming the ADC bit depth doesn’t cut off information. Outside of noise reduction (a lot of Sony cameras do pre and post ADC noise reduction), nothing changes that floor or ceiling.
I shoot on Fuji cameras at 640 ISO. The resulting image is clear and has a gritty filmic look to it. No one can usually tell it's a pro-sumer grade camera vs like an Alexa and some people even think I shot things on film. I started out in 35mm, and really didn't like the newer clean clinical look of digital. It has its place like in nature films and other areas for sure.
Great video. Thank you. I love the way your video looks, by the way. Do you use some sort of cinema filter? (I’m a beginner, so I’m sorry if that’s not the question to ask.)
Another great video, anytime I see someone sharing the gospel on ISO I get feels. Only one note I would add... ISO does NOT change the sensitivity of a digital sensor, native or dual native sensor are fixed.... In general these "native" ISO's are where the camera manufacturer has best tuned for dynamic range and noise patterns... they are not actually more or less sensitive to light... Hence Gain... It's still the same process, ISO just became adopted after the DSLR revolution. Also The ISO is going to change from manufacturer to manufacture... DO NOT TRUST ISO to be accurate to film equivalents. Other then those points I totally agree, CZcams has had a massive impact on the way DP's (especially in the last decade and a half)... the obsession with clinical images seems largely of a byproduct of test footage/review culture... Film was never clean and honestly go back and look at something like Heroes/Lie To Me from the late 2000’s would be considered by many "unuseable"... an at the same time the photo chemical process had reached the ability to deliver film stock and printing techniques that would be considered sterile by many now days chasing the "film look". I think most most great DP's will tell you its about your choices, your process and if you are working with a DP, its about what the two of you are looking for... not about "The right way"... This also goes for the current ongoing obsession with "perfect soft light".... but that's another topic.
@@Vitaphone don’t even get me started on soft light, mostly because I heavily disagree with the over reliance on big soft light. it’s good to know how to achieve it, but it’s robbing you of the creative choices a DP has to make if you use it exclusively in every scenario. Either way, thanks for sharing. That’s important info. Anyone in these comments please reference above in addition to the video!
@@mitchellbrinkerdp would love to start seeing more working DP’s on the CZcams space opening up on the soft light/ “perfect exposure” topic… it’s been wild to see commercial and commercial photography lighting ideas dominate a lot of the conversation in the post CZcams era… Most DP’s I work with with years under their belt skoff at this, but newer generations seem obsessed with the CZcams meta.
I love the look of this video specifically. I always try to replicate this kind of lighting and feel but I can't quite get it down, my footage always ends up looking either too cold or too warm.
Some good stuff here. Important to note though that how ISO changes above/below middleG distribution changes depending on the camera/brand, etc. you're using. Clog2 on C200 for instance caps the distribution at ISO800 and allows you to go below 800 and distribute down into the shadows but going above 800 doesn't actually shift into the highlights but it remains flat all the way up, only increasing the gain. So you only have 800 and below on that camera to redistribute if you want vs. other cams which tend to move the distribution above/below middleG up or down. Anyways, always good to test this stuff and understand how one cam responds under what circumstances. Noise doesn't bug me at all really, compression making noise look worse is sometimes the culprit or why I think "yuck." A little chroma noise reduction can go a long way too vs. trying to scrub the noise out.
@@mitchellbrinkerdp Yea it really depends on the cam. The gain situation on C200 was also why most people found themselves frustrated by the noise at the supposed base 800, because it already had 12db of gain, while ISO200/400 was 0db and 6db. Google "clog2 iso eoshd" in Google Images and you should find the chart.
Wow I had no idea about the more details in the shadows and highlights part of ISO. Thank YOU! Now I’m even less afraid of making a video in my room at 3200. Some people do that on purpose! 😂
Does anybody have links to ISO distribution graphs for Sony mirrorless series? I'm using A7iii. Side note, your framing in this video is incredibly detailed! Very cool
you also need to consider camera's that are effectively "ISOless" with iso invariance. effectively meaning shooting at lower iso's will preserve the highlights while also letting you boost the shadows without adding any more noise than if you shot for the shadows
EI (Exposure Index) and ISO are different things! Changing ISO by gain up or down lowers the DR. Cameras with EI (shoots at base iso) or shot in RAW format (amplification done in post, in camera only metadata changes), such as arri or venice, dislocates the DR. You are talking about "shoring to the left" that is super valid, but be careful on how to do that on mirrorless style cameras. You can create fake EI with luts with lower stops or in this case more exposure.
@@muuuuusic6269 definitely does, especially since the A7S3 and FX3 have the same sensor. If you go to the 12800 base iso, you won’t have anymore information in the highlights. You’ll have the same 6/8 in the highlights and shadows as you do at 800. If you raise the iso from either base, you will get those stops in the highlights.
Isn't the optimal approach to use one of your camera base ISO's (though the ridiculous 12,800 on the FX3 is actually noisier just because of quantum fluctuations- physics!) and use ND filters and/or lighting (or light control) to make that base ISO 'correct' ?
@@Juhkwez I googled the individual ISO/dynamic range charts for the camera. It’s hit or miss whether there is one. Or maybe I couldn’t find them. For the FX30, I think you’d be safe using the FX3 chart for reference. That one’s a bit easier to find.
@@sebm2334 there may be some tests online that have gathered that information. I know it exists for the Alexa, Venice, and FX3. Otherwise it’s the type of thing you’d also want to test yourself.
@@mitchellbrinkerdp thanks for the quick answer, im asking from a photographers perspective, tried looking it up for the nikon d700 but could only find the overall dynamic range for each iso not whether its in the highlights or shadows
Only true uncompressed raw behive like this. Worked with many cameras. Only Alexa cameras, sigma fp and kinefinity cameras and cameras that shot true raw behive like this. They all shot 12 or 14bit raw in 4:4:4 color subsampling. On my sigma fp if I switch to 8bit h264 rules doesn't apply. Even in 10bit 4:2:2 gets tricky 😊
does this apply to photography with actual cameras ? if yes, my understanding is that rising iso and adding nd filter I could get better highlight roll-off ?
I just asked that myself after watching this video, so I did a quick test in my garden. Tested at ISO 64 & 2500 on a Nikon D850: no difference in highlight-recovery. Both are equally good. Only drawback: recovering shadows at ISO 2500 compared to 64 makes your camera look like from 2005 (or some 1600-speed film haha). Just as expected. I'll just stick to choose ISO-settings how it always used to be.
Hopefully, I can shed some light on what's actually going on with that ARRI chart Mitchell is referencing (haha, sorry for the pun, I couldn't resist!) The "shifting" in dynamic range that you are seeing when the ISO is changed in the ARRI chart is absolutely, 100% NOT what happens when ISO is adjusted in normal camera operation. ARRI is actually applying very special parameters in-camera that do not occur in normal camera operations. The point is, you don't have to worry about using your ISO the wrong way, unless you are shooting video with an ARRI Alexa, or other certain camera models in certain shooting modes. Nothing has changed in how we understand ISO and how it affects image quality. For most of us, changing your ISO will not cause your camera's dynamic range to start drastically shifting up and down in multiple stops. SHORT VERSION: This is a technology that a lot of camera manufacturers are using nowadays mainly for videographers that require maximum image quality, flexibility in post-processing and tonal range. Also some photography applications using a menu setting to activate. What you're seeing is the result of corrections happening in-camera in real time during shooting using sensor technology and in-camera software from manufacturers. The bottom line is there will not be these large shifts in dynamic range performance by simply using different ISO's in typical shooting for most photographers; unless you are using particular cameras and particular shooting modes for specific applications. LONG VERSION: There is a very important reason why the dynamic range "shifts" when the ISO changes. Notice how ARRI's total dynamic range is always 14.5 stops of light regardless of which ISO is selected, it is simply "shifting" up or down. It has to do with what is actually happening in-camera before raw files are even written to a card. Canon also does this with their HTP (Highlight Tone Priority) as well as Sony's DRO (Dynamic Range Optimizer). Which they offer as a menu feature you can turn on/off and was even in the old Canon Rebel's and Sony's A57 and NEX-7's from many years ago. The modern A7S series also uses a similar feature for "log" when shooting video, as well as many other manufacturers that are now using a "log" setting for videographers. ARRI also uses this method to help directors/cinematographers acheive maximum image quality in any lighting situation and give more flexibility in post-processing. They are all changing/moving the "base" ISO (i.e. removing the ability to select certain ISO's) in order to provide more stops of tonal range for a given lighting scenario. What is happening is in-camera parameters are applied to the exposure and curves, pre-RAW stage. Basically, when you want more stops of highlights and make a selection accordingly in-camera, the camera then intentionally underexposes the image during capture, then digitally "gains" the brightness back up to original exposure before sending the file to be written to a card. This is all happening in-camera during the imaging chain before the photographer ever sees the file. The underexposure is performed automatically by reducing sensor amplification (i.e. lowering ISO) while maintaining shutter and aperture selections. For example, if your camera's normal base ISO is 100, but your camera is using this mode, it will increase your minimum available ISO to 200. So if you are shooting at ISO200 @ 1/30sec. & f/2.8 in this mode, the camera will automaticaly reduce sensor amplification by 1-stop to ISO100 @ 1/30sec. & f/2.8. This will give you 1-stop of extra highlights. Then software in-camera gains the brightness back up exactly 1-stop to match your original selected exposure. Also, some curves are applied to help the highlights "roll-off" better. The downside is that underexposure causes a loss in detail in the shadows and more noise (less light = more noise). This is why the dynamic range appears to "shift" with less and less shadow information as you gain more and more highlight information. If you want better/cleaner shadows you can inversely lower or "pull" the base ISO below it's minimum by forcing the camera to overexpose, then pulling the exposure back down to it's original exposure. This gives more tonal range in the shadows with better detail and less noise, but at the cost of less detail in the highlights. Overexposure provides more shadow detail, and underexposure provides more highlight detail. It's always a trade off. This is why ARRI's chart @ 1:59 is always equal to exactly 14.5 stops and the dynamic range is only "shifting" up or down. DPReview gives an excellent explaination of this technology in one of their camera reviews: "Highlight Tone Priority option (Custom Function II.6) is a method for capturing more information in the brightest parts of the scene. It does this by applying less amplification to the signal coming from the sensor, then compensating for it by using a different tone curve to ensure the correct brightness in the final image." *reference: www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos600d/12 Canon's HTP, Sony's DRO, of course ARRI, and pretty much any company that offers a "log" video shooting mode with a "base" ISO of like 800 or even 3200 minimum ISO are basically all doing the same thing: overriding exposure by adjusting sensor amplification at image capture, then compensating back to original exposure with in-camera software corrections using curves to preserve tonal range. All of this is done in the blink of an eye, out-of-sight and out-of-mind of the photographer. This is the technology being using today. Shooting at high ISO's during the day and low ISO's at night is a great idea if you are shooting video with an ARRI Alexa, based on how they designed it to operate. But it is important to understand that this is NOT a representation of how ISO fundamentally works. This is a technology available in certain cameras, for certains applications, in certain shooting modes. What matters is the specific camera you are using and understanding how it works to get the best image quality possible out of your gear.
So you are telling me if I want a very high key image, rather than shooting at iso 100 I should instead shoot at 3200 and add an ND and that will produce a better quality image?
@@tobiasyoder not necessarily. whether the image is high key or low key is going to come down to your lighting. changing the iso won’t change your lighting. but if you are in a very bright environment or somewhere with a lot of bright highlights, raising your iso and ND’ing down can help retain more information in the highlights.
Why don‘t you just ETTR? If the DR shifts from more stops below average grey to more stops above but the total amount stays roughly the same, it shouldn‘t matter too which ISO you pick but rather how you expose, right? Maybe I am lacking the practical examples here.
As I’m watching this video I had a moment where I thought “this is exactly what CZcams was made for.” Simple but high-quality video filled with amazing info, re-watchable, and not even 10 mins long. Great work. Instant subscribe
Within 30 seconds of your video, you explained iso incorrectly. ISO is brightness gain. It does not let your camera see more light or less light. That involves the aperture of your lens opening up to let the light come in to hit the sensor. Just find out what the base iso is on your device and under expose your content.
@@SoldatRaggio im aware it’s gain and how it works. it’s ultimately all the same thing. what’s important is understanding how iso affects your exposure and image. everything here about dynamic range, noise, etc is the case. also iso does allow your camera to see more light. increasing the gain on the sensor makes it more sensitive to light allowing it to see more. how else can you explain being able to go into a dark room at 12800 and get exposure without clipping false color?
I think you have to be careful when telling this to a beginner because I have mentored interns and co workers who don’t understand ISO and just wing it half of the time and their footage looks bland, over exposed or underexposed. I think it’s better teaching someone new that base ISO’s are a good starting point and should always be where you start and if you can always stay on those base ISO’s. I think what you’re teaching is an advance technique which is really cool and I think good but I hope it doesn’t misinform people who are just learning
at the end.. "im really runnning out of light"
just bump the iso bro xD
Speaking of organic noise from digital cameras, I was blown away when I learned that The Holdovers was shot digitally. Apparently, they shot the Alexa at 1280 ISO to add natural texture in camera, before hitting it with heavy film emulation in post (with added grain/halation/gate weave). I was pretty much convinced that it was shot on specially made film stocks from the 70s, but it wasn't!
I did the same thing with a short I shot on the Mini LF. I pushed it to 1600. It’s Black & White, super high contrast. The noise pattern looks great. 3200 on the Mini LF looks like 16mm
I can think of two additional reasons as to why you want noise added back to your image
1. It reduces H.264 compression artifacts in places that have gradients, for example the wall in your left(screen right),.
2. It reduces stepping in color gradients that occur when your high bitrate image gets inevitably crushed to 8-bit, causing color steps to become more visible. DIgital video only looks clean when the bitrate is absurdly high.
I have definitely learned to embrace camera noise over the years.
Love it when actual DP's who know what they're talking about chime in on youtube. There is so so so much misinformation coming from these video gurus
Great insight on the importance of intentionally using your tools. The BMPCC 4k is very interesting with its ISO chart
This is crazy. I’ve refused to watch this video for a few weeks now but I thought for sure this was clickbait. But you’re right, I’ve actually been doing this wrong 😂😂😂 thanks
The bit about 'gain' you moved through quite quickly is actually critical as it explains much more literally what's happening at the sensor level. This is because each camera actually only has one ISO rating, you mention it as the 'base' iso, anything above or below that is gain added to the sensor signal /after/ the photo diode well, so it doesn't actually make the sensor more sensitive to light. It just takes that same sensor signal and add signal gain down the image pipeline. Think of it like gain in audio. This is why the 'rated' iso for a camera system often has an equal distribution of usable stops above below the 0EV line, and 'iso' ratings above and below that native sensitivity don't incrase the total amount of usable stops (which WOULD be an increase in sensitivity) but instead just shift where those stops of range are assigned, giving you more available stops in the highlights or more in the shadows, but not both. This is just like adding 'gain' in audio (or in colour finishing for that matter). You can't add gain to find sound that wasn't sensed in the first place by the recorder, you can only move the whole measurement up (and the noise floor with it), same thing with light. The reality is that our hardware digital sensors can actually record way more light than a single ADC can capture and convert into signal, that's why ARRI run dual 14bit ADCs, to increase the range of signal the recorded file is able to hold at any one time without clipping off the top/bottom values.
while i do agree with most of your points, I do want to point out certain architectures like the Exmor in the Sony Venice line do have two sets of metal wirings for each of its native EI, which effectively shifts the curve at no cost to signal to noise ratio. This leads to my disagreement with your approach of the information, because I don't think it is necessary to go into electrical engineering under a video that is meant for general consumption. there is an old training video for engineer students where the presenter is just saying technical sounding nonsense and is expecting the audience to follow. sure, what you are saying might sound sane to your peers, but that belongs in a white paper, not in an educational youtube video.
Different gain circuits certainly do give the camera a second or even third base ‘rating’, not to mention DGO sensors like the Alexa ALEV mentioned. My comment was more trying to cover the fundamental idea of what iso adjustments are actually doing (adding or subtracting signal gain to a given base sensitivity). In terms of the information though, you’d be surprised. This isn’t exactly a complicated part of image sensor technology nor is this a general audience. The information in technology white papers are exactly what Directors of Photography want to know so that they are informed about what they’re actually operating with, rather than get misled by clever marketing. It’s certainly not just something relevant only to engineers.
I shot a video about this exact same topic that I just haven't got around to finishing. What you're talking about here is SO crucial for run and gun type filmmakers and I'm not sure why it's not talked about more on CZcams. This adds to a handful of videos I've seen discussing it. CZcamsrs always say shoot everything at the camera's native ISO for the 'most dynamic range' and that is just so wrong. I would have saved myself a ton of unuseable footage if I had just known this earlier. I shot a short documentary last year and I got some of my best looking footage ever. Deep shadows with Zero noise. Completely blew my mind
Hurry up and get it done! You need to post some videos, bro!
Ya please post soon!
Great video Mitchell! More and more I find I'm having to rework my mind when it comes to how I should observe/handle ISO. This is not only a great reminder but an addition to how I think I'll view ISO moving forward. Grain can be good!
best iso video ive ever seen! You got a follower more! Now i finallyy understand iso... photography (and hopefully cinematocgraphy in the future) will step up now. Thanks man!
All this information is correct. Nice work. ISO is not about how good or bad a camera is … it’s about how good or bad a cinematographer is. The original ARRI Alexa at HD is still the best image for that film look.
I was expecting the usual 'the right iso' video, but instead you got a new subscriber! Very well put I would say!
I would also add that there's also people shooting things outside of well lit sets, I find myself very often shooting wildlife, so very long zooms, high F stops, on a Micro 4/3 sensor because of the reach and the convenience, most likely while being in a dark forest 😅. I have to use different shutter speeds and iso than the 'correct' ones because otherwise it would be better if I stayed at home 😂
I'm not even a photographer nor filmographer, but this video was super interesting and very well done, good job man.
thanks for the clear, concise, informative video without a ton of added fluff / filler! learned a lot
this video might be top 5 videography lessons I’ve ever got
love the way this looked.
Related to texture, I thought that Anatomy of a Fall had a cool and pretty simple process where they used super 35 lenses on the mini LF sensor.
Bro, holy shit! I've been taking pictures for a year with always 200 ISO. Just tried this on my GX80 and my images are not only more sharp but has a little more life. Thank you so much!
Simple, clear and effectively communicated 👌🏾
I agree with the concept of adding noise but you explained the exposure physics right. I'm a computer engineer, it's more technical. The ISO is how you set the range of the data captured by the bit depth of the camera, for example 8-bit, 10-bit, HLG, SLog3, etc. When you are adjusting the gain, you are setting the minimum and maximum range of the light you're capturing, which you can refer to as clipping the light on the sensor and normalizing (i.e. setting from 0-100%) to the bit depth. You have have heard the terms Expose to the Left/for the shadows, and Expose to the Right/for the highlights, and expose for the center/shadow and highlights. The light that is coming in is in a certain number range, and you need to scale that range so that you capture the dynamic range that you need. You do this with a histogram. You will see in the histogram that the light coming in at the different frequency ranges, and you need to get all of the information into the histogram that you want to capture. You can adjust your exposure compensation, and this will shift the light pixel data to the left or right of the histogram, hence the name expose to the left or right. If you are using 8-bit SLog3 in sunlight, you will either have to expose to the left or right with SLog3, or turn of log and expose to the center, but you will not be able to recover shadows or highlights. You are using the gain to set the range of the 8-bit and 10-bit color data, which means each pixel is either 24-bits (8-bits times 3) or 30-bits (10 bits times 3), but they pack that up in YUV format to get 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 subsampling, which is confusing, to do the Hybrid Log Gamma and SLog2/SLog3/CLog/FLog/etc All of them are variations on HLG, which is part of the HDMI standard but none of the other brands log curves are HDMI standards.
Hi, Cale, can I bother you with a technical question given that you seem to know about this stuff?
Do histograms we see in the camera display the RAW data (the RAW histogram?) or the histogram of a JPEG? Once we get to processing software, does that change?
@@davidturner5 I would assume it's coming in raw. The white balance only adds and subtracts rbg values (usually HSV to RGB but Mokose uses RGB). The sensor is RGB, and the value is 0 to 100%.
@@CaleMcCollough Groovy, thanks. As I recall, the image on the back of the camera is a JPG, which makes sense given that RAW data can't be displayed "raw" and *some* sort of display/output decisions must be made in order to show it there. I suppose I wondered whether the histogram reflected that in-camera JPG conversion, but I can see now where my intuitions might have misled me.
this was such helpful insight, thank you so much 🙏🏻
Tysm for this. I often second guess whether I should change my ISO or aperture for my shots
Insanely helpful, great video
Noise used to be a huge problem back when cameras were mostly using compressed codecs. But now with less compression and even raw internally in some hybrid cameras now I don't think it's as much of an issue.
man this makes so much sense haha, thanks for sharing!
Great video … thanks dude really helped my understanding
Great video! Thanks for this Mitchell!
Great video Mitchell! It would interesting to see you do a noise pattern comparison video.
"You're the cinematographer, you tell me" You dropped fire one liners throughout the vid. good stuff lol
What an amazingly useful video!! Thank you❤
Nice video man😃I have the fx30 with dual iso and “should” I still use the higher base ISO for outdoor and vice versa or does it not matter if they have 6 stops each direction either way? Also would’ve been cool to see the last clip you were talking about🙂
Oren Soffer said exactly this in his Sony FX3 tutorial on the Sony YT channel. High ISO and ND down.
With Sony cameras in EI mode ,EI ( exposure index ) its not ISO , your recording will always be in one of the two base ISO,s. EI is just like rating a film stock different than whats on the can , that is setting a light meter to 250 ISO on 500ISO rate film stock . Sony EI works like this too. If your base ISO is set to 800 , and you set the EI to 400, viewing with a MLUT , your image will get 1 stop darker from the correct exposure , so add light or open up 1 stop, you are intentionally setting a uniformed 1 stop over exposure off set , because your recorded image will still be 800ISO, and will look stop over exposed in Slog play back. So it's a bit tricky and counter intuitive , raise the EI , and you will get way under exposed recorded footage . Viewing without a LUT you will see no change in the image at all ,changing the EI.
this was an amazing video, my R6 has amazing dynamic range so I can shoot at 10000 ISO and theres only a little bit of grain. I did not know about shooting high iso in sunlight to get better highlights, thank you so much!
This is a gem of a vid! Thank you 😊
Wow, brilliant post. Thank you, Mitchell.
I really enjoyed this video. As a Videgrapher I’m trying to level myself up and just purchased the FX3. I’m really obsessed with light and how that plays an integral role in my story telling. I did this after my CZcams video colours and lighting were just waaaay off. I’ve been practicing and this knowledge you shared helped someone like me more than you know. It might be common knowledge but that you. I had no idea.
I just got an FX3 myself . Am I crazy but the HD in this camera really rocks I can blow it up 200% and the eyes and face in the picture are still crisp and in focus 😮. I’m finding using the base ISO is not always the best option.
@@wotiluv really funny you say that! I am working on a video and I was saying out load how insane the zoom capabilities are! Ill upload it around tomorrow so stay on the look out. See if you can pick out the really zoomed shots. I was astonished! But I did that at 4k. I am really happy with this camera. I love it soooo sooo much!
@@32SIX I can’t wait to see it lmk when it’s up
As of now 430 views, I hope it get's plenty of traction. Very valuable information that would help lot's of people.
When I color for people, I often get questions of whether they should target a certain ISO and over/under exposure level.
I've simplified it to "your camera has one ISO its always recording at no matter the setting (or two if its dual native) and one white balance. Everything other ISO is a level on the volume nob. If it's not well exposed at native, it's not well exposed at all."
Not exactly, but better than overthinking it!
@@Lathrop_Media what do you mean? Outside of native ADC reading, everything else is gain functions. Even internally, the camera will just perform analog or digital gains on the sensor info when shifting ISOs or white balance. Peak pixel well saturation is fixed and sensor read noise level is fixed, so your floor and ceiling is static, assuming the ADC bit depth doesn’t cut off information. Outside of noise reduction (a lot of Sony cameras do pre and post ADC noise reduction), nothing changes that floor or ceiling.
Thanks for the insight 💡
Good points. I never thought of using the ISO to emulate a film look. Sounds worth experimenting with. Thanks. New subscriber.
I shoot on Fuji cameras at 640 ISO. The resulting image is clear and has a gritty filmic look to it. No one can usually tell it's a pro-sumer grade camera vs like an Alexa and some people even think I shot things on film. I started out in 35mm, and really didn't like the newer clean clinical look of digital. It has its place like in nature films and other areas for sure.
I’m getting a BMPCC OG specifically for the noise pattern.
Thanks for this!
Hi I love the info you lay out on the video. I would like to ask where can I find the camera ISO to dynamic distribution chart? Thanks.
Really cool I learned a lot!
Great video. Thank you. I love the way your video looks, by the way. Do you use some sort of cinema filter? (I’m a beginner, so I’m sorry if that’s not the question to ask.)
@@0xggbrnr I grade in Davinci. This was one of my LUTs with some tweaking. I may post them in the future if that’s something people end up wanting.
Another great video, anytime I see someone sharing the gospel on ISO I get feels.
Only one note I would add... ISO does NOT change the sensitivity of a digital sensor, native or dual native sensor are fixed.... In general these "native" ISO's are where the camera manufacturer has best tuned for dynamic range and noise patterns... they are not actually more or less sensitive to light... Hence Gain... It's still the same process, ISO just became adopted after the DSLR revolution.
Also The ISO is going to change from manufacturer to manufacture... DO NOT TRUST ISO to be accurate to film equivalents.
Other then those points I totally agree, CZcams has had a massive impact on the way DP's (especially in the last decade and a half)... the obsession with clinical images seems largely of a byproduct of test footage/review culture... Film was never clean and honestly go back and look at something like Heroes/Lie To Me from the late 2000’s would be considered by many "unuseable"... an at the same time the photo chemical process had reached the ability to deliver film stock and printing techniques that would be considered sterile by many now days chasing the "film look".
I think most most great DP's will tell you its about your choices, your process and if you are working with a DP, its about what the two of you are looking for... not about "The right way"... This also goes for the current ongoing obsession with "perfect soft light".... but that's another topic.
@@Vitaphone don’t even get me started on soft light, mostly because I heavily disagree with the over reliance on big soft light. it’s good to know how to achieve it, but it’s robbing you of the creative choices a DP has to make if you use it exclusively in every scenario.
Either way, thanks for sharing. That’s important info. Anyone in these comments please reference above in addition to the video!
@@mitchellbrinkerdp would love to start seeing more working DP’s on the CZcams space opening up on the soft light/ “perfect exposure” topic… it’s been wild to see commercial and commercial photography lighting ideas dominate a lot of the conversation in the post CZcams era… Most DP’s I work with with years under their belt skoff at this, but newer generations seem obsessed with the CZcams meta.
my life changed when I discovered shooting pictures in bright daylight at 800 iso using the dr400 setting on my X100F
for someone who wants to get more serious about recording, what's a great intro camera to learn on?
Very useful. Thanks.
I love the look of this video specifically. I always try to replicate this kind of lighting and feel but I can't quite get it down, my footage always ends up looking either too cold or too warm.
Great video and very few people talk about this!
Awesome video, very informative.
Some good stuff here. Important to note though that how ISO changes above/below middleG distribution changes depending on the camera/brand, etc. you're using. Clog2 on C200 for instance caps the distribution at ISO800 and allows you to go below 800 and distribute down into the shadows but going above 800 doesn't actually shift into the highlights but it remains flat all the way up, only increasing the gain. So you only have 800 and below on that camera to redistribute if you want vs. other cams which tend to move the distribution above/below middleG up or down. Anyways, always good to test this stuff and understand how one cam responds under what circumstances. Noise doesn't bug me at all really, compression making noise look worse is sometimes the culprit or why I think "yuck." A little chroma noise reduction can go a long way too vs. trying to scrub the noise out.
@@KyleProhaska this is interesting. I didn’t know that. Canons always out here being…. Fine
@@mitchellbrinkerdp Yea it really depends on the cam. The gain situation on C200 was also why most people found themselves frustrated by the noise at the supposed base 800, because it already had 12db of gain, while ISO200/400 was 0db and 6db. Google "clog2 iso eoshd" in Google Images and you should find the chart.
It did! also that Peanuts short is so rad. Would love to see a bts on that. As always, thanks for the good shit!
Wow I had no idea about the more details in the shadows and highlights part of ISO.
Thank YOU!
Now I’m even less afraid of making a video in my room at 3200. Some people do that on purpose! 😂
Does anybody have links to ISO distribution graphs for Sony mirrorless series? I'm using A7iii.
Side note, your framing in this video is incredibly detailed! Very cool
agree 101%
you also need to consider camera's that are effectively "ISOless" with iso invariance. effectively meaning shooting at lower iso's will preserve the highlights while also letting you boost the shadows without adding any more noise than if you shot for the shadows
@@dyrwolv which cameras?
@@mitchellbrinkerdp off the top of my head I know the A73 and the Nikon z6 z7 are.
It’s a rather interesting rabbit hole to go down.
great content
EI (Exposure Index) and ISO are different things! Changing ISO by gain up or down lowers the DR. Cameras with EI (shoots at base iso) or shot in RAW format (amplification done in post, in camera only metadata changes), such as arri or venice, dislocates the DR. You are talking about "shoring to the left" that is super valid, but be careful on how to do that on mirrorless style cameras. You can create fake EI with luts with lower stops or in this case more exposure.
what lens filter are using for this vid? looks so good
@@joshclark9700 just an ND on the lens. I do use scatter, so I may have that running in post. If I do it’s a 1/8 BPM
Damn man. Loved the video. got soo much out of it.
cool video, good info
Excelent video!!
Amazing insight. Does this apply to sony a7s3?? If i want to shoot during daylight at 12800 I will suffer
@@muuuuusic6269 definitely does, especially since the A7S3 and FX3 have the same sensor. If you go to the 12800 base iso, you won’t have anymore information in the highlights. You’ll have the same 6/8 in the highlights and shadows as you do at 800. If you raise the iso from either base, you will get those stops in the highlights.
@@mitchellbrinkerdpgreat tip! Thank you so much 🙏🏼
Next up: crop factors vs. "light sensitivity" myths and legends, or why multiplying your f number by a crop factor doesn't make sense
Isn't the optimal approach to use one of your camera base ISO's (though the ridiculous 12,800 on the FX3 is actually noisier just because of quantum fluctuations- physics!) and use ND filters and/or lighting (or light control) to make that base ISO 'correct' ?
How do I find that dynamic range chat for the fx30?
@@Juhkwez I googled the individual ISO/dynamic range charts for the camera. It’s hit or miss whether there is one. Or maybe I couldn’t find them. For the FX30, I think you’d be safe using the FX3 chart for reference. That one’s a bit easier to find.
How do you find the dynamic range per iso for another camera?
@@sebm2334 there may be some tests online that have gathered that information. I know it exists for the Alexa, Venice, and FX3. Otherwise it’s the type of thing you’d also want to test yourself.
@@mitchellbrinkerdp thanks for the quick answer, im asking from a photographers perspective, tried looking it up for the nikon d700 but could only find the overall dynamic range for each iso not whether its in the highlights or shadows
What gear are u using for this video?
@@JuanLuisBst just a good ol’ FX3 and a 5-in-1 diffuser shoved in between the blinds and window
Only true uncompressed raw behive like this. Worked with many cameras. Only Alexa cameras, sigma fp and kinefinity cameras and cameras that shot true raw behive like this. They all shot 12 or 14bit raw in 4:4:4 color subsampling. On my sigma fp if I switch to 8bit h264 rules doesn't apply. Even in 10bit 4:2:2 gets tricky 😊
Great Video
Some might use their ISO wrong, but you are using your lavalier microphone wrong.
@@DutchDiederik nah I prefer holding it
ty
@@daywar anytime
does this apply to photography with actual cameras ? if yes, my understanding is that rising iso and adding nd filter I could get better highlight roll-off ?
I just asked that myself after watching this video, so I did a quick test in my garden.
Tested at ISO 64 & 2500 on a Nikon D850: no difference in highlight-recovery. Both are equally good. Only drawback: recovering shadows at ISO 2500 compared to 64 makes your camera look like from 2005 (or some 1600-speed film haha). Just as expected.
I'll just stick to choose ISO-settings how it always used to be.
@@violet_world9385 excellent ! thank you very much in taking time to make the test and writing !
@@josejuncal9342 Very welcome!
@@violet_world9385 Are those ISO settings the base ISOs for that camera? And, did you use an ND filter when you shot at the higher ISO?
@@NationalCORE1 Base is 64 and yes.
Hopefully, I can shed some light on what's actually going on with that ARRI chart Mitchell is referencing (haha, sorry for the pun, I couldn't resist!)
The "shifting" in dynamic range that you are seeing when the ISO is changed in the ARRI chart is absolutely, 100% NOT what happens when ISO is adjusted in normal camera operation. ARRI is actually applying very special parameters in-camera that do not occur in normal camera operations.
The point is, you don't have to worry about using your ISO the wrong way, unless you are shooting video with an ARRI Alexa, or other certain camera models in certain shooting modes. Nothing has changed in how we understand ISO and how it affects image quality.
For most of us, changing your ISO will not cause your camera's dynamic range to start drastically shifting up and down in multiple stops.
SHORT VERSION:
This is a technology that a lot of camera manufacturers are using nowadays mainly for videographers that require maximum image quality, flexibility in post-processing and tonal range. Also some photography applications using a menu setting to activate. What you're seeing is the result of corrections happening in-camera in real time during shooting using sensor technology and in-camera software from manufacturers. The bottom line is there will not be these large shifts in dynamic range performance by simply using different ISO's in typical shooting for most photographers; unless you are using particular cameras and particular shooting modes for specific applications.
LONG VERSION:
There is a very important reason why the dynamic range "shifts" when the ISO changes. Notice how ARRI's total dynamic range is always 14.5 stops of light regardless of which ISO is selected, it is simply "shifting" up or down. It has to do with what is actually happening in-camera before raw files are even written to a card. Canon also does this with their HTP (Highlight Tone Priority) as well as Sony's DRO (Dynamic Range Optimizer). Which they offer as a menu feature you can turn on/off and was even in the old Canon Rebel's and Sony's A57 and NEX-7's from many years ago. The modern A7S series also uses a similar feature for "log" when shooting video, as well as many other manufacturers that are now using a "log" setting for videographers. ARRI also uses this method to help directors/cinematographers acheive maximum image quality in any lighting situation and give more flexibility in post-processing. They are all changing/moving the "base" ISO (i.e. removing the ability to select certain ISO's) in order to provide more stops of tonal range for a given lighting scenario.
What is happening is in-camera parameters are applied to the exposure and curves, pre-RAW stage. Basically, when you want more stops of highlights and make a selection accordingly in-camera, the camera then intentionally underexposes the image during capture, then digitally "gains" the brightness back up to original exposure before sending the file to be written to a card. This is all happening in-camera during the imaging chain before the photographer ever sees the file. The underexposure is performed automatically by reducing sensor amplification (i.e. lowering ISO) while maintaining shutter and aperture selections. For example, if your camera's normal base ISO is 100, but your camera is using this mode, it will increase your minimum available ISO to 200. So if you are shooting at ISO200 @ 1/30sec. & f/2.8 in this mode, the camera will automaticaly reduce sensor amplification by 1-stop to ISO100 @ 1/30sec. & f/2.8. This will give you 1-stop of extra highlights. Then software in-camera gains the brightness back up exactly 1-stop to match your original selected exposure. Also, some curves are applied to help the highlights "roll-off" better. The downside is that underexposure causes a loss in detail in the shadows and more noise (less light = more noise). This is why the dynamic range appears to "shift" with less and less shadow information as you gain more and more highlight information.
If you want better/cleaner shadows you can inversely lower or "pull" the base ISO below it's minimum by forcing the camera to overexpose, then pulling the exposure back down to it's original exposure. This gives more tonal range in the shadows with better detail and less noise, but at the cost of less detail in the highlights. Overexposure provides more shadow detail, and underexposure provides more highlight detail. It's always a trade off. This is why ARRI's chart @ 1:59 is always equal to exactly 14.5 stops and the dynamic range is only "shifting" up or down.
DPReview gives an excellent explaination of this technology in one of their camera reviews:
"Highlight Tone Priority option (Custom Function II.6) is a method for capturing more information in the brightest parts of the scene. It does this by applying less amplification to the signal coming from the sensor, then compensating for it by using a different tone curve to ensure the correct brightness in the final image."
*reference: www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos600d/12
Canon's HTP, Sony's DRO, of course ARRI, and pretty much any company that offers a "log" video shooting mode with a "base" ISO of like 800 or even 3200 minimum ISO are basically all doing the same thing: overriding exposure by adjusting sensor amplification at image capture, then compensating back to original exposure with in-camera software corrections using curves to preserve tonal range. All of this is done in the blink of an eye, out-of-sight and out-of-mind of the photographer. This is the technology being using today.
Shooting at high ISO's during the day and low ISO's at night is a great idea if you are shooting video with an ARRI Alexa, based on how they designed it to operate. But it is important to understand that this is NOT a representation of how ISO fundamentally works. This is a technology available in certain cameras, for certains applications, in certain shooting modes. What matters is the specific camera you are using and understanding how it works to get the best image quality possible out of your gear.
I don't mind noise as long as it's not color noise as it just looks ugly...
So you are telling me if I want a very high key image, rather than shooting at iso 100 I should instead shoot at 3200 and add an ND and that will produce a better quality image?
@@tobiasyoder not necessarily. whether the image is high key or low key is going to come down to your lighting. changing the iso won’t change your lighting. but if you are in a very bright environment or somewhere with a lot of bright highlights, raising your iso and ND’ing down can help retain more information in the highlights.
@@mitchellbrinkerdp super interesting. Gonna have test it before I really accept it haha
Nice one
My conclusion: use auto-ISO.
🔥🔥🔥
Good video.
🙏🏾
Why don‘t you just ETTR? If the DR shifts from more stops below average grey to more stops above but the total amount stays roughly the same, it shouldn‘t matter too which ISO you pick but rather how you expose, right?
Maybe I am lacking the practical examples here.
FINALLY
interesting
No I'm not....I use it exactly howI wan't to use it
haha...I came up in the ASA generation. Ever heard of it?
@@checkeredflagfilms ASA forever
no im not
(yes I was)
As I’m watching this video I had a moment where I thought “this is exactly what CZcams was made for.” Simple but high-quality video filled with amazing info, re-watchable, and not even 10 mins long. Great work. Instant subscribe
8:30 so lower your ISO :)
My dumbass though he was gonna talk about iso from valorant
im swapping to a valorant channel now
You look like stephen curry
Using high ISO is like plugging a ukulele into a massive amplifier and expecting it to sound like an electric fender.
@@SHDEdits you’d be pretty surprised then at how many films and shows you’ve seen that have been shot at incredibly high ISOs.
😂
Within 30 seconds of your video, you explained iso incorrectly.
ISO is brightness gain. It does not let your camera see more light or less light. That involves the aperture of your lens opening up to let the light come in to hit the sensor.
Just find out what the base iso is on your device and under expose your content.
@@SoldatRaggio im aware it’s gain and how it works. it’s ultimately all the same thing. what’s important is understanding how iso affects your exposure and image. everything here about dynamic range, noise, etc is the case.
also iso does allow your camera to see more light. increasing the gain on the sensor makes it more sensitive to light allowing it to see more. how else can you explain being able to go into a dark room at 12800 and get exposure without clipping false color?
I think you have to be careful when telling this to a beginner because I have mentored interns and co workers who don’t understand ISO and just wing it half of the time and their footage looks bland, over exposed or underexposed. I think it’s better teaching someone new that base ISO’s are a good starting point and should always be where you start and if you can always stay on those base ISO’s. I think what you’re teaching is an advance technique which is really cool and I think good but I hope it doesn’t misinform people who are just learning
First