It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so confusing.

It's because of the way manufacture's label camera settings. They don't apply base 2 logarithms
consistently.

There are two reasonable rules:
1. Each detent on a control (aperture, shutter, ISO, exposure compenstation) must be EXACTLY
twice (or half) the exposure of the previous detent; and
2 Each should be labeled in integers: ... -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3....

If you do this consistantly, you get the Additive Photographic Exposure System (APEX)
which was standardized way back in 1960 (ASA standard ASA PH2.5-1960) and was used
in industry and by the military (where confusion is not OK).

EC knobs (and menus) generally follow both rules: No compensation is labeled "0". Increasing
exposure by one stop is labled "1". Decreasing exposure by one stop is labeled "-1". Anyone
confused by this? Pretty simple, right?

F-numbers follow Rule 1, but not Rule 2. The sequence 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, etc. is a lot more
complicated than 1,2,3,4,5... And you don't need to know the actual f-stop ratio unless you are
building a camera.

Shutter speeds are a mess. They follow neither rule. This sequence makes sense:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, .... This one doesn't: 1, 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 125, 250, 500, .....
What's the rule for latter sequence, pray tell?

ISO speeds are given in two different sysems: ASA and DIN. Both follow Rule 1, but only DIN
follows Rule 2. The ISO "standard" is to use BOTH! (Sure sign of a gutless committee trying to
please everybody.) The ASA number isn't even logarithmic. And ASA 100 is DIN 21 -- why 21?
"Historical reasons".

Finally, Exposure values follow Rule 1 but not Rule 2 -- again for "historical reasons".
"Historical reasons" is a polite way of saying S.N.A.F.U.

Exposure is confusing because of the silly, stupid, inconsitent way in which cameras controls
are labeled.

Here's the "Sunny 16" rule in the traditional Tower of Babel system:

At approx. EV 15 and f/16, use shutter speed 1/ASA speed
for example:
At approx. EV 15 and f/16 and ASA 100, use 1/100th sec

(which of course, isn't even a detent on the shutter dial-it only has 125.)

Here the general rule in APEX:

Does this math confuse anybody? Dang simple, if you ask me.
So by subtracting SensitivityValue from both sides:

As usual, people are willing to update their hardware and software (= buy stuff) but not their thinking.
Picture a cave man holding a Nikon. "Og like take photos. But Og confused by exposure." No wonder!


For reference, here's the basic system, as standardized in 1960.

APEX SYSTEM (per ASA PH2.5-1960)

Note: this may differ from EXIF Version 2.2.

APERTURE

SHUTTER SPEED

The original APEX standard kept the irregular shutter times: 1, 1/2, 1/4,1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125....

In fact, some cameras are already calibrated to 1/16, 1/32, 1/64... Shutters are rarely accurate enough
to tell the difference except at 1/15 <> 1/16.

FILM/SENSOR SPEED



BRIGHTNESS

Again, the original standard kept the irregular shutter speeds, so it had to have
irregular brightnesses as well.

So why do the light measurement mess and the exposure mess exist?

Because the scientific and engineering disciplines most related to measuring light and to
photographic exposure are photometry and sensiometry, respectively.

And photometrists and sensiometrists are few and far between (the latter especially so since
the switch to digital).

Moreover, neither discipline has a powerful professional organziation, such as the Instittue of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) or the Society of Automative Enegineers (SAE).
If the IEEE or SAE cared about it, it would have been fixed long ago.

Lastly, there is the inherent inertia of culture. Once people learn something one way--no matter
how messy--they don't want to change. So eventually digital camera global shipments decline
by over 70% since 2011.... and still no change in the photographic dogma.

Smart phones are a lot simpler: only one or two f/stops.

True enough. Just imagine the cost of everyone in the USA -- mechanics, auto shops wholesalers and
retail stores -- having to keep two sets of every type of wrench (spanner) they use or sell.

It's even worse when you consider photometry. The following units of measure are used in the USA:

Luminance stibs (CGS system), apostibs, lamberts, foot-lambert, lumens per steridion-square meter,
candelas per square foot, candela per-square meter (metric, SI)

Illuminance: phots (CGS), foot-candles, lux (SI), lumens per square meter (metric, equivalent to lux)

Moreover, luminance units are often used for illuminance, and vice versa. Are we having fun yet?
Welcome to the Land of the Fee...

BTW, sloscheider, how's that Brexit thing working out for you?

It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so confusing.

It's because of the way manufacture's label camera settings. They don't apply base 2 logarithms
consistently.

There are two reasonable rules:
1. Each detent on a control (aperture, shutter, ISO, exposure compenstation) must be EXACTLY
twice (or half) the exposure of the previous detent; and
2 Each should be labeled in integers: ... -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3....

If you do this consistantly, you get the Additive Photographic Exposure System (APEX)
which was standardized way back in 1960 (ASA standard ASA PH2.5-1960) and was used
in industry and by the military (where confusion is not OK).

EC knobs (and menus) generally follow both rules: No compensation is labeled "0". Increasing
exposure by one stop is labled "1". Decreasing exposure by one stop is labeled "-1". Anyone
confused by this? Pretty simple, right?

F-numbers follow Rule 1, but not Rule 2. The sequence 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, etc. is a lot more
complicated than 1,2,3,4,5... And you don't need to know the actual f-stop ratio unless you are
building a camera.

Shutter speeds are a mess. They follow neither rule. This sequence makes sense:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, .... This one doesn't: 1, 2, 4, 8, 15, 30, 60, 125, 250, 500, .....
What's the rule for latter sequence, pray tell?

ISO speeds are given in two different sysems: ASA and DIN. Both follow Rule 1, but only DIN
follows Rule 2. The ISO "standard" is to use BOTH! (Sure sign of a gutless committee trying to
please everybody.) The ASA number isn't even logarithmic. And ASA 100 is DIN 21 -- why 21?
"Historical reasons".

Finally, Exposure values follow Rule 1 but not Rule 2 -- again for "historical reasons".
"Historical reasons" is a polite way of saying S.N.A.F.U.

Exposure is confusing because of the silly, stupid, inconsitent way in which cameras controls
are labeled.

Here's the "Sunny 16" rule in the traditional Tower of Babel system:

At approx. EV 15 and f/16, use shutter speed 1/ASA speed
for example:
At approx. EV 15 and f/16 and ASA 100, use 1/100th sec

(which of course, isn't even a detent on the shutter dial-it only has 125.)

Here the general rule in APEX:

Does this math confuse anybody? Dang simple, if you ask me.
So by subtracting SensitivityValue from both sides:

As usual, people are willing to update their hardware and software (= buy stuff) but not their thinking.
Picture a cave man holding a Nikon. "Og like take photos. But Og confused by exposure." No wonder!


For reference, here's the basic system, as standardized in 1960.

APEX SYSTEM (per ASA PH2.5-1960)

Note: this may differ from EXIF Version 2.2.

APERTURE

SHUTTER SPEED

The original APEX standard kept the irregular shutter times: 1, 1/2, 1/4,1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125....

In fact, some cameras are already calibrated to 1/16, 1/32, 1/64... Shutters are rarely accurate enough
to tell the difference except at 1/15 <> 1/16.

FILM/SENSOR SPEED



BRIGHTNESS

Again, the original standard kept the irregular shutter speeds, so it had to have
irregular brightnesses as well.

If I were trying to understand exposure based on things I read today, I probably wouldn't get close to a reasonably exposed shot. Exposure --and the shutter speed, aperture, ISO/ASA/EI values that determine it-- is not the stuff of convoluted analogies, computational mathematics, or lengthy confabulations. Its the stuff of go-out-and-shoot-it while paying freaking attention to what you aimed the camera at, and what settings you used that worked or the settings you used that didn't work. Jeez!