# Start accepting the pro-photographers are not perfect.



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

There are pro-photographers out there are obsess with shooting at iso 100 all the times as I mentioned on previous thread.  I took a photography class at the community college and one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100 on all assignments, no exception! Last night, I was shooting at the party event, and I met a pro-photographer who has 40 years in film slr experience.  He recently got canon 70D.  He told me a lot of image he shoot are blurry, so he is planning to get a Nikon with full frame sensor.  He also going to get an aftermarket lens, and he said it is cheaper, more durable, and far sharper than canon lenses.  That is what I get for hanging around those photographers.  They don't make any sense and that is their opinions.  There opinions are not always right.  So, chill out and start accepting who they are.


----------



## tirediron (Dec 28, 2014)

Umm... okay.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

I'm not referring to you.


----------



## paigew (Dec 28, 2014)

Doesn't sound like a very knowledgable pro 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tirediron (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> I'm not referring to you.


I didn't think you were, just didn't really understand your point.


----------



## Didereaux (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> There are pro-photographers out there are obsess with shooting at iso 100 all the times as I mentioned on previous thread.  I took a photography class at the community college and one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100 on all assignments, no exception! Last night, I was shooting at the party event, and I met a pro-photographer who has 40 years in film slr experience.  He recently got canon 70D.  He told me a lot of image he shoot are blurry, so he is planning to get a Nikon with full frame sensor.  He also going to get an aftermarket lens, and he said it is cheaper, more durable, and far sharper than canon lenses.  That is what I get for hanging around those photographers.  They don't make any sense and that is their opinions.  There opinions are not always right.  So, chill out and start accepting who they are.




You must keep in mind when dealing with people like your 'pro' who have been doing something for 40 years.  Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the very definition of insanity.  The other is that village idiots have to practice too...some of them for 40 years or more!.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

tirediron said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not referring to you.
> ...



Some of the members in this forum don't like what they hear when I talk about my experiences with other photographers.  Should I tell those photographers straight in their faces, "You don't know jacks about photography!?"


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> ........ one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100 on all assignments, no exception! ..........



And the other teachers?  They're OK with 200, or 400, or 800,.......... or (*gasp!*) 1600?

I'd say THWI... shoot at 200 or 400 and see if the teacher even notices.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

480sparky said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > ........ one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100 on all assignments, no exception! ..........
> ...



That teacher is nit picky.  She always check the meta data.


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> That teacher is nit picky.  She always check the meta data.




Edit it.


----------



## D-B-J (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > tecboy said:
> ...



Clearly not an artist then. 

Personally, who the hell cares how or what settings/gear were used? Photography is an ART.  Teachers like that aren't letting you be an artist and using your tools to the fullest potential. I shoot anywhere between ISO 50 and ISO 12,800.  Sometimes BOTH in the same day!!!!! GASP!


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 28, 2014)

I can understand a teacher wanting all students to use one ISO. It will get you higher on the shutter speed/aperture, learning curve without tossing in a third variable which would complicate and dilute your attention to the other two factors. I hope this is a beginning photo class.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> There are pro-photographers out there are obsess with shooting at iso 100 all the times as I mentioned on previous thread.  I took a photography class at the community college and one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100 on all assignments, no exception! Last night, I was shooting at the party event, and I met a pro-photographer who has 40 years in film slr experience.  He recently got canon 70D.  He told me a lot of image he shoot are blurry, so he is planning to get a Nikon with full frame sensor.  He also going to get an aftermarket lens, and he said it is cheaper, more durable, and far sharper than canon lenses.  That is what I get for hanging around those photographers.  They don't make any sense and that is their opinions.  There opinions are not always right.  So, chill out and start accepting who they are.



\
Tecboy...how you doing with your flashlights?

Listen up Tecboy. Follow what is right for you. If I followed all the advice I get on the forum I'd be sunk. Too many prejudiced camera fondlers on the forums. A lot of my pix they said are trash are all in museums or public collections.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Dec 28, 2014)

_MG_0982 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Look at all these damn photogs they got nowadays?


----------



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> I can understand a teacher wanting all students to use one ISO. It will get you higher on the shutter speed/aperture, learning curve without tossing in a third variable which would complicate and dilute your attention to the other two factors. I hope this is a beginning photo class.



The rest of the teachers in the photography department don't mind what iso the students are using as long the photographs look really good.  Another teacher said, sometimes more noises have artistic side in the photograph.  

This particular teacher teaches studio lighting.  I think she is trying to get the student to shoot more look the magazine advertisement.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 28, 2014)

Ilovemycam said:


> _MG_0982 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
> 
> Look at all these damn photogs they got nowadays?


This photo shot in iso 400.


----------



## pgriz (Dec 28, 2014)

As Gary noted, there must be a reason why ISO 100 is being asked for.  Otherwise it seems kinda silly to remove one of the more important abilities of digital cameras.  If she does not have a good reason, then I'd be really careful about accepting instruction from a "pro" who deliberately does not use all the tools at her disposal.  In the end, it's not whether they are "pros" or not that should be important, but whether they know what they are doing, and are able to deliver superior results.  I know of amateurs who are superb masters of their craft.


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 28, 2014)

Perhaps I should ask someone (demand, rather) to build a house with just a hammer and a hand saw.


----------



## pgriz (Dec 28, 2014)

tecboy said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> > I can understand a teacher wanting all students to use one ISO. It will get you higher on the shutter speed/aperture, learning curve without tossing in a third variable which would complicate and dilute your attention to the other two factors. I hope this is a beginning photo class.
> ...



Ok, then in that context, the point is to have enough lighting of the right kind, and resorting to a higher ISO to compensate for inadequate lighting kinda defeats the purpose.


----------



## runnah (Dec 28, 2014)

480sparky said:


> Perhaps I should ask someone (demand, rather) to build a house with just a hammer and a hand saw.



Challenge accepted


----------



## runnah (Dec 28, 2014)

From a learning perspective I can see it being a good way to teach.

From a professional standpoint it has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.


----------



## Overread (Dec 28, 2014)

We accept that other photographers are not perfect. This will not diminish our desire to keep bombarding you with advice and information and hints and clues and facts on how to improve yourself. 

I mean we won't unless you ask us really nicely to.





YEP you can get away not knowing much, in fact you'll never learn all there is to know of something. But that shouldn't stop you trying. Shouldn't stop you wanting to and seeking to improve. Sure maybe you've seen some locals, even teachers, who have some clear problems in how they shoot. Or maybe its just a different approach they are using (there are often several ways to approach the same situation - heck exposure wise there are something like 8 or so "correct" exposures from a histogram correct definition for any scene - each one giving a different visual result of course, but each one is technically correct). 




As for the ISO 100 teacher - go ask them. Find them when they've got more than 5 minutes and sit down and have them go through clearly why they only want you to shoot at ISO 100. Don't accept "because its what I want you to do" or "because its right" or anything else avoiding it - get the answer from them. Because there might be a very good reason for it - or there might not be. Until you get a clear answer from them for the reason you will remain confused.


----------



## Overread (Dec 28, 2014)

runnah said:


> From a learning perspective I can see it being a good way to teach.
> 
> From a professional standpoint it has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.



I can see how using ISO 100 can be a good starting point; cuts down on complexity and removes one of three variables making the photographer think about balancing the other two. But personally I'd see it as a short term approach. Let them get some basics in the other two and then introduce ISO as a variable. I'd not want it be something that students worked with for an extended period of time otherwise it is going to be that much harder to then get them to use the ISO higher than 100.


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 28, 2014)

pgriz said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > Gary A. said:
> ...


If this is a beginning class, after a week or two of understanding shutter and aperture and how the quantity of light affects both ... then open up ISO as the third exposure variable after a foundation of shutter and aperture ... that works. In a pure studio environment that also works. ... But you know what they say ... Those who can do ...


----------



## runnah (Dec 28, 2014)

Overread said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > From a learning perspective I can see it being a good way to teach.
> ...




Sounds to me like the teacher is an old school film person. It makes sense because both my college and high school photo classes only used 100 speed film for both. Odds are they haven't changed thier approach to keep up with times.


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 28, 2014)

Actually the imperfection aspect of photographers is an element which draws me to photography. It is the challenge that every image can be made better ... everytime I grab my camera I am thinking of how I can improve upon the last time I grabbed my camera. (Responding to the OP ... just remember that some photographers are more imperfect than others.)


----------



## runnah (Dec 28, 2014)

Am I alone in thinking that the spinning dials part of photography is such a small part of the whole endeavor? The only smaller portion is the gear you use.


----------



## Overread (Dec 28, 2014)

runnah said:


> Am I alone in thinking that the spinning dials part of photography is such a small part of the whole endeavor? The only smaller portion is the gear you use.




Eh trying to weight things like that is generally, in my view, an attempt by people to gloss over those areas they don't understand all that well; so they downplay them.

The camera is CRITICAL to photography; as critical as a car is to a driver or paint to a painter. Without it you can't do photography. 

To say that the dials are minor is again silly; try shooting with only one single setting or just turn them randomly - sure you can do that but eh you won't get the results you want

Each part is important in its own way and for its own reasons. If you try to justify some kind of overall order of importance your argument will be nit-picked to bits (which is mostly what threads that go down that path do - they nit-pick each other apart). You have to step back - to realise that each stage is important. 

Then realise that once you've learned those stages to the point where its near instinctive to do that you've moved on in learning. That you're ready for the next phase. That means you are - not that the newbies walking in the door are - they are back at the start and can't easily jump-start the starting stages (you can sort of if you've got a close mentor/student relationship). 
Rather than focus energy on debating the importance or relative importance of things the key is to devote your time to either helping others along the journey or promote the next stage.

Talk about how you compose - what you think of when shooting - what inspires and drives you. Or maybe you want to talk about subjects - posing models - how to communicate - how to really work on a street shooting street - or in a warzone or up a tree going for the nest shot of the eagles in the tree over the ways etc...


----------



## runnah (Dec 28, 2014)

Overread said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Am I alone in thinking that the spinning dials part of photography is such a small part of the whole endeavor? The only smaller portion is the gear you use.
> ...




I know it's important but I am at the point now where it's second nature and not really a think I am concerned about. Folks are so obsessed with the "right" setting are wasting time.


----------



## Overread (Dec 28, 2014)

runnah said:


> I know it's important but I am at the point now where it's second nature and not really a think I am concerned about. Folks are so obsessed with the "right" setting are wasting time.



Not really, they are just at what I'd consider is an earlier learning stage. To you its instinctive, chances are even if you mess up on settings you can easily look back and know what to do to fix any problem. 

Others aren't so far along so to them asking and focusing on the settings is an important step. Because its only by devoting attention to it that one can learn it. And I mean really learn it to the point where its more instinctive. Most of us are capable of that (if you don't think you are, consider that there's a strong chance you might drive a car already - you might be no "sports driver" but chances are you can know the gear positions, the throttle and brake and clutch pretty darn well without having to think about it and in time checking the mirrors is second nature!). 

There is today also a bit of a hinderance because many get into photography through point and shoot devices (inc phones) which operate on "fireworks mode - landscape mode etc.." Teaching the idea that there is a fixed setting for each different scene. Learning the balance of the 3 core parts of a photographic exposure and how to adjust and what those adjustments means takes time. I'd also say that each time they change what they are working in also almost requires  total relearning of those impacts until such point as which they've built up enough experiences in varied situations that they can more easily evaluate what the settings will do (or what settings are practical and possible given the situation, subject and light).


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 29, 2014)

runnah said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps I should ask someone (demand, rather) to build a house with just a hammer and a hand saw.
> ...



Have at it.

No ladders.  No levels.  No tape measures.  No squares.  No knives.  No planers.  No string.  No transits.  No screwdrivers.  No pliers.  No chisels.  No wrenches.  No star drills.  No bits and braces.  No paint brushes.  No hacksaws.  No shovels.  No spades.  No rakes.  No clamps.  No staple guns.  No tin snips.  No pry bars.  No allen wrenches.  No pop rivet tools.  No pipe cutters.  No torches.  No scaffolding.  No lasers.  No chalk lines.  No trowels.  No sledgehammers.  


Just this:


----------



## waday (Dec 29, 2014)

480sparky said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > 480sparky said:
> ...


An igloo would work with just a saw, no hammer.


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2014)

Am I the only one who thinks that maybe just maybe the OP misunderstood what the teacher was asking ?

I can see a teacher telling a student to go out for a day and shoot at ISO 100 as an assignment, maybe just to see if the student understands exposure.


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 29, 2014)

BillM said:


> Am I the only one who thinks that maybe just maybe the OP misunderstood what the teacher was asking ?
> 
> I can see a teacher telling a student to go out for a day and shoot at ISO 100 as an assignment, maybe just to see if the student understands exposure.



I think it's pretty clear.



tecboy said:


> ........one teacher wants all the students to shoot at iso 100* on all assignments, no exception*! .........


----------



## Designer (Dec 29, 2014)

The instructor wants them all shot at ISO 100 to make evaluations more evenly matched.  Then the instructor can weigh each student's work against the others based on something besides camera quality.


----------



## beachrat (Dec 29, 2014)

Not intending to be insulting or ANYTHING like that,but I don't think the OP's first language is English either.
Makes him somewhat difficult for me to understand.
(although,i'm from New York and English around here ain't the greatest so maybe I'm mistaken)


----------



## Scatterbrained (Dec 29, 2014)

480sparky said:


> BillM said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only one who thinks that maybe just maybe the OP misunderstood what the teacher was asking ?
> ...


Or is it. . . . .. he states in a later post that the teacher who wants only "iso 100" teaches studio photography.   I can't think of a reason to use anything but iso 100 in the studio.


----------



## snerd (Dec 29, 2014)




----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2014)

I like bread


----------



## Alexr25 (Dec 29, 2014)

480sparky said:


> BillM said:
> 
> 
> > Am I the only one who thinks that maybe just maybe the OP misunderstood what the teacher was asking ?
> ...


Yes its clear as far as it goes but that is not the full story. In a later post the OP says the teacher teaches studio lighting. 
In a studio where you have total control of the lighting levels it is not unreasonable to insist that all students shoot at the same ISO.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 29, 2014)

The class is Commercial Lighting.  It is an advanced class.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 29, 2014)

Alexr25 said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > BillM said:
> ...



In studio lighting, it doesn't have to be ISO 100 all the time.


----------



## 480sparky (Dec 29, 2014)

So you must buy 100 ISO film?  Analog isn't dead... they still make film.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Dec 29, 2014)

tecboy said:


> Alexr25 said:
> 
> 
> > 480sparky said:
> ...


In a studio you should be able to shoot at iso 100 all the time.  You have total control over the light, there's no excuse to need to up the iso.    You make it sound like the teacher has you walking all over town shooting at iso 100, then you point out that they want iso 100_ in a controlled studio setting_.   That's a huge difference.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 29, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > Alexr25 said:
> ...



There is time I need to increase the DOF, and sometimes the monolight is not powerful enough to get the right exposure.  I still have to increase the ISO.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Dec 29, 2014)

Add more light.       You're doing this in school right?   Don't they have enough lights?      You can also see if they have a technical camera, put the DOF where you  need it.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Dec 29, 2014)

BTW, if you're doing still lifes (rather than portraits) then you can just use the modeling lights and drag the shutter.   They didn't say how long the shutter speed had to be.


----------



## tecboy (Dec 29, 2014)

Actually, this teacher is really good.  She just clearly explained that she wanted clean, less noise, high quality photographs like you see in the magazine advertisement.

  When I take a film slr class, I used film ISO 400.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Dec 29, 2014)

You have to be ready to _work_?? _and_ you can't eat or drink during class?? forget it! 

I'm kidding, that actually makes sense. I was thinking like someone else mentioned that maybe she wanted students to work on learning to adjust shutter speed and aperture more than ISO. Good to ask, an instructor ought to be able to explain the reason.

I think you often can get different opinions from different professionals or instructors, etc. There isn't always a right and wrong but different ways something can be done. I think you just need to take from a class what works for you and know that everything they suggest may not work best for you. But it's worth trying what's suggested in a class, you might learn something new.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 30, 2014)

I think she is probably trying to keep it as simple as possible, she probably used to teach on film where you were stuck with the iso of the film and she has carried it on into teaching digital, learn the basics of shutter speed and aperture then worry about iso


----------



## sashbar (Dec 30, 2014)

C'mon, there are some near perfect pro photogs


----------



## Braineack (Dec 30, 2014)

tecboy said:


> Actually, this teacher is really good.  She just clearly explained that she wanted clean, less noise, high quality photographs like you see in the magazine advertisement.



how are you supposed to learn photography that way?


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 2, 2015)

tecboy said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > tecboy said:
> ...



It's usually easier to just listen to what these "experienced" photographers have to say and then walk away.  Years doesn't always translate into knowledge.


----------



## runnah (Jan 2, 2015)

I know for a fact Scott frequently leaves the toilet seat up. 

See? Not perfect.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 2, 2015)

As a long time shooter I feel that I can offer pretty good advice on shooting, not the technical why, just the stand in front of a subject and point out what I see.  As a teacher, sending students out on an assignment where they can only shoot at iso100 is good, same as having them all use the same lens on an assignment. Having the students always shoot at iso100 makes no sense to me, but there must be a reason why, ask.

There are lots of camera owners out there that have been shooting for years and still having figured out what they are doing, the years/skill curve is a flat line.  I learn from other photographers I trust, what I find is more young photographers watching what I'm doing and when I walk away and look back they are standing in the same spot looking, it doesn't mean they saw the same things, but it does mean they are paying attention. Some ask me questions, most don't, I offer suggestions if I see it will help.  I don't claim to be perfect, never have, I'm good at shooting a wide variety of sports/photojournalistic style events, but have weaknesses in other areas, I can't offer the best advice in weak areas and don't try and BS my way through it.

Take all the advice you receive from other photographers/teachers use what you need and delete the rest, it's not always going to be right for you.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 2, 2015)

runnah said:


> I know for a fact Scott frequently leaves the toilet seat up.
> 
> See? Not perfect.



If this is directed at me, I always put the toilet seat down.  I have my OCD under control somewhat, somewhat, somewhat.


----------



## runnah (Jan 2, 2015)

imagemaker46 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > I know for a fact Scott frequently leaves the toilet seat up.
> ...



I don't know any other pros on the forum. 

So take it as a compliment wrapped in a bad joke.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 2, 2015)

I see so many accredited photographers at events that have no clue what they are doing, that they end up getting in the way. They don't do their homework before heading out and simply look lost, the up side is that they all migrate to each other looking for answers.  The majority avoid talking to me, maybe I just look  busy or intimidate them, regardless, they all have each other.


----------



## limr (Jan 2, 2015)

If she is grading your ability to work in a studio, then limiting the ISO is taking away a variable that could allow you to "cheat" and it makes it easier for her to judge how well the student can control the lighting elements and other camera settings without resorting to cranking the ISO. It puts the same limitation on all students so it's easier to judge the performance of the other variables.


----------



## TCampbell (Jan 4, 2015)

Now that it's understood that it's studio photography... it all makes sense.  In the film days we had a refrigerator loaded with 100 ASA film.  No reason to use anything else.  Lighting is never a problem... the studio is loaded with lighting gear.  Rather than increasing the ISO, you change the lighting.

I think of lighting as the 4th leg of the exposure "triangle".  People forget that in addition to changing the shutter speed, aperture, or ISO... you can ALSO change the lighting.

I would go farther and say it's practically the POINT of studio photography is to learn about the lighting, controlling the light, etc.  If you force yourself to stay at ISO 100 and then learn to reposition the lights or dial the power up or down, you'll probably learn more about lighting by doing that.

In that regard, the class instructor is probably doing you a favor.


----------



## JohnBoy (Jan 6, 2015)

Long time since I've been here - must visit more often. I agree that it is reasonable for the instructor to insist on a fixed ISO when teaching studio photography but I just wonder why 100 and not 200. I've yet to use a digital camera that produces better image quality at 100 than at 200;  after all their sensors do not behave like film and 200 seems to be the "natural speed" of most sensors. With modern studio lights offering a minimum power setting of at least 1/32nd, I can't see that anyone would often need 100 ISO even to achive minimum DOF with very fast lenses wide open. As you would guess, I don't use ISO 100 and I do a lot of studio work under flash.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 6, 2015)

I'm perfect!


----------



## photog15 (Jan 7, 2015)

Trying to teach people with only one ISO is not teaching. This is extremely limiting and it's hard to believe someone thinks that's a good way to open people's minds to the many different ISO types and the results they produce. Maybe for an assignment or two that's fine but all the time? She wouldn't get my money!


----------



## Designer (Jan 7, 2015)

I think there is a valid reason for it, which I've already posted.


----------



## Bebulamar (Jan 11, 2015)

TCampbell said:


> I think of lighting as the 4th leg of the exposure "triangle".  People forget that in addition to changing the shutter speed, aperture, or ISO... you can ALSO change the lighting.



I agree that lighting is a mean of controlling exposure. If we really think about it ISO is not part of exposure. 
1. If you add more light the subject is brighter and thus more exposure.
2. If you use a larger aperture, more light gets thru and thus more exposure.
3. If you open the shutter longer that's more exposure.

If you you increase the ISO the resulting image is brighter with the SAME amount of exposure and thus the exposure doesn't change with a change of ISO.


----------



## Forkie (Jan 11, 2015)

I've never formally studied photography except for a one week studio lighting course a couple of years ago and we all shot at ISO 100 the whole time.

I agree with the people here who say that in a studio, there is no need to shoot at anything higher than ISO 100, especially if you are shooting commercial, advertising grade images - you don't want any hint of noise in your images whatsoever, unless perhaps you are doing conceptual editorial shoots where noise is needed for artistic purposes.  I rarely shoot over ISO 64 in the studio - there's no need.


----------



## Overread (Jan 11, 2015)

Bebulamar said:


> TCampbell said:
> 
> 
> > I think of lighting as the 4th leg of the exposure "triangle".  People forget that in addition to changing the shutter speed, aperture, or ISO... you can ALSO change the lighting.
> ...



If ISO was just a "brighter" photo then yes this would be true - but its not. 

You can try this yourself by setting an aperture and shutter speed which at ISO 100 would result in a fully black, ergo underexposed, photo. Sure you might be able to get some information back, but chances are you won't you'll get black, some info and a LOT of noise. 

Now raise the ISO up to a decent level to get a good exposure and compare the results. Your second shot with a higher ISO will have less noise and more general detail and contrast and richness in colours. 

So for a photo ISO is part of the photographic exposure. Just like the ASA was in the film days - the only difference is that today we've got the ability to change the ASA/ISO on the fly (ok you could do this with some film cameras, but it was slower and required carrying multiple film backs). Also new sensors (esp the Sony ones) are significantly improving the recovery possibilities with underexposed photos. Though whilst there is improvement it still won't equal a higher ISO and a proper exposure.


----------



## Bebulamar (Jan 12, 2015)

I didn't mean that changing the ISO doesn't have an effect on the resulting image as it does. It is difficult to explain but ISO or sensitivity isn't the exposure. You give the film (or imaging sensor) an exposure which depending on the film (or sensor) sensitivity to light (ISO). If you change the sensitivity the result changes but the exposure is still the same. The exposure is a product of Light Intensity times Duration. To change the exposure the Intensity and/or duration must be changed. Changing the sensitivity you get different results but the exposure is still the same.
In another word if 2 people sun bathing in the same location for the same time they both receive the same amount of exposure to sunlight and UV radiation but one person suffers skin burn and the other does not because their skin have different sensitivity to UV radiation but they both receive the same exposure.


----------



## chuasam (Jan 12, 2015)

I shoot at ISO 64 so there 
Seriously, shooting at your lowest ISO is like driving around in only one gear  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Overread (Jan 12, 2015)

Bebulamar - yes the exposure is still the same if we stick to the hard-science definition of exposure. ISO has no effect here since its the light amount times the time exposed. 

However in general conversation most photographers include ISO because they are talking about the photographic exposure they have - or rather the results of the exposure on the medium which includes the ISO/ASA value as a variable.


----------

