Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Let's Put the Exposure Triangle Aside
Page <<first <prev 8 of 8
May 1, 2016 11:19:52   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Uuglypher wrote:
........................................!

That's all the evidence you can produce?

Even that post is blatantly dishonest. It is evidence that you were not truly ignoring me you would not have even bothered.

You are in over your head.

Reply
May 1, 2016 11:30:50   #
billgdyoung Loc: Big Bear City, CA
 
surely this discussion will be the cause of my Delete button giving up the ghost...

Reply
May 1, 2016 16:22:30   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Uuglypher at 11 AM EDT wrote:
........................................!

So much for ignoring me. You sent me a PM at 1 PM EDT with the title. "You've no authority...in any sense of the word!"

No need to reveal the content of the PM. Needless to say you were expressing your frustration at being unable to "win" this argument.

Well gooooolly! Who left you in charge?

The point here is not winning or losing. It's about gaining knowledge and perspective through sharing of information and evidence.

I have learned quite a bit while thinking through this process and presenting evidence on this thread and others in the past few days.

You seem to feel that you have nothing left to learn, no evidence you need to provide. That's your loss, not mine.

Reply
 
 
May 1, 2016 19:56:30   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
selmslie wrote:
So much for ignoring me. You sent me a PM at 1 PM EDT with the title. "You've no authority...in any sense of the word!"

No need to reveal the content of the PM. Needless to say you were expressing your frustration at being unable to "win" this argument.

Well gooooolly! Who left you in charge?

The point here is not winning or losing. It's about gaining knowledge and perspective through sharing of information and evidence.

I have learned quite a bit while thinking through this process and presenting evidence on this thread and others in the past few days.

You seem to feel that you have nothing left to learn, no evidence you need to provide. That's your loss, not mine.
So much for ignoring me. You sent me a PM at 1 PM... (show quote)


No argument to win, Scottty.
I've no expectation of you adopting what is to you a novel idea. and you ought have no expectation I'll go back to using your film -appropriate exposure technique.

Why keep it up, Scotty?

'til then:
.....,,.............................,....!

Reply
May 2, 2016 00:00:52   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Some say ISO should not go in the Exposure Triangle because strictly speaking the sensitivity of the camera sensor, unlike film, does not change.

Instead, in digital photography, an amplification of the signal from the sensor happens to emulate film sensitivity, continuing to use a traditional term, ISO, to name this sensitivity.

Even so, practically speaking, others have come to treat ISO as if the same as film sensitivity.

So in use, ISO still goes with the Exposure Triangle, despite the technical view.
rmalarz wrote:
While writing another article which contained reference to photographic exposure, a thought occurred to me, one that simplifies understanding the relationship between f-stop, shutter speed, and ISO.

For the purposes of this article, we are going to need some definitions. These are not made up definitions, they are scientific in nature.

Exposure -
Exposure = Intensity x Time

Intensity is how bright, time is how long.

That is pretty simple. We have the luminance of the scene that passes through the lens and the length of time the shutter is open. That’s it. We can regulate the intensity through the use of an iris, or f-stop. Shutter speed is regulated by the shutter speed settings on the camera. Because of the mathematical nature of exposure, these two quantities work together.

These two settings, f-stop and shutter speed, regulate the light passing through the lens. These are located on one side of the camera. On the other side of the camera, usually the back, we have a photo sensitive material.


Sensitivity -
Sensitivity is the degree of response to light, preferably for this discussion within the visible spectrum. This sensitivity is given a rating which is defined by the International Standards Organization (ISO). The greater the numerical value the more sensitive to light the material is. Again, this is pretty simple.


There are a few other related concepts that are important to keep in mind, but we won’t concern ourselves with those, in detail, at present. Those concepts are shutter speed determining how fast the image is captured. If one is trying to capture moving subjects a faster speed is advised. f-stop affects depth of field. The smaller the f-stop the larger the depth of field. Now that we’ve mentioned those, we can put them aside. We are concerned with the relationship of shutter speed and f-stop (exposure), and ISO (sensitivity).

Now, let’s see how the two subjects of our discussion interact with one another. I know we’ve all been exposed to the Exposure Triangle. So, now, let’s forget that we’ve ever seen it.

Again, we are concerned with two items on one side of the camera, and one item on the other. This is the system with which we are going to do some mental exercises.

We are going to imagine this system is a beam balance scale (see below for the illustration). The balance works such that when the weight on one side is equal to the weight on the other, the beam of the scale is horizontal, as shown below.

One the left side, just for a matter of choice, let’s put two weights. One weight is labelled f-stop, the other shutter speed. On the other side of the scale, we are going to put a weight labelled ISO.

The concept is that we have to keep the scale balanced. If we change the amount of weight labelled f-stop, we’re going to have to change the weight labelled shutter speed to maintain that balance. A smaller amount of f-stop requires a larger amount of shutter speed to maintain equilibrium. Conversely, a smaller amount of shutter speed is going to require a larger amount of f-stop.

Now, if we change the ISO side, we have to change either one or the other, or both f-stop and shutter speed to compensate. That is actually how simple the relationship is. It’s not complicated at all.

The additional matters that one needs to keep in mind are, as mentioned earlier, depth of field, stopping motion, etc. This is why taking a photograph becomes more of a system management exercise than just pointing a camera and clicking a shutter. There are trade offs to be made. You, as the photographer, manage these trade offs. And that is the essence of photographic exposure.
--Bob
While writing another article which contained refe... (show quote)

Reply
May 2, 2016 01:15:47   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
anotherview wrote:
Some say ISO should not go in the Exposure Triangle because strictly speaking the sensitivity of the camera sensor, unlike film, does not change. ....

Exactly correct. ISO simply amplifies the signal recorded by the sensor.

But there is nothing wrong with combining it with the other two and treating them like a triangle since they affect each other directly.

Reply
May 2, 2016 04:38:40   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
It seems agreed that just as chosen ISO amplifies (to the chosen degree) the signal recorded by the sensor, and the ASA/D.I.N./ISO of film defines the effect of the amount of light that reaches the emulsion, in both cases the effect of the number of photons reaching the photosensitive surface (the exposure) is characterized in terms of the relative brightness of the ultimate image produced.
Hence, exposure (as defined by shutter duration and aperture) is influenced by film sensitivity or chosen ISO to determine image brightness.

The "photographer's triangle" is a useful mnemonic to display the relationships of three factors. However, having been called the "exposure triangle" has confused the definition of "exposure" in the minds of many. This is, to my mind, Bob's useful message with this thread.

Dave

Reply
 
 
May 2, 2016 09:47:44   #
anotherview Loc: California
 
Exactly: "But there is nothing wrong with combining it with the other two and treating them like a triangle since they affect each other directly."

Reply
May 2, 2016 10:51:39   #
Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)
 
But far better it be called the "Image brightness triangle" . To do so would please legions of photography teachers who presently have to remediate by clarifying the meaning of "exposure"!

Dave

Reply
Page <<first <prev 8 of 8
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.