Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Why is exposure so confusing?
Page <<first <prev 4 of 13 next> last>>
Jan 22, 2019 07:23:08   #
billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
 
Bipod wrote:
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:

TimeValue + ApertureValue = SensitvityValue + Brightness
E.g., at approx. EV 15:
5 + 8 = 5 + 8

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

Brightness = TimeValue + ApertureValue - SensitivtyValue
8 = 5 + 8 - 5

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

f-number APEX
1 0
1.4 1
2 2
2.8 3
4 4
5.6 5
8 6
11 7
16 8
22 9
etc.

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.

Nominal Sec. APEX
1 1 0
2 1/2 1
15 1/15 2
30 1/30 3
60 1/60 4
125 1/125 5
250 1/250 6
500 1/500 7
1000 1/1000 8
etc.

FILM/SENSOR SPEED


ASA DIN APEX
100 21 5
200 22 6
400 23 7
800 24 8
1600 25 9
etc.


BRIGHTNESS

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


APEX FOOT LAMBERTS
1 2
2 4
3 8
4 15
5 30
6 60
7 125
8 250
9 500
10 1000
etc.
It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so co... (show quote)


Someone who was buying a camera in the 70's asked the salesman why the camera and lens had so many numbers on it. The salesman, stone faced said, "you add up all the numbers and that's the cost of the camera."

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 07:34:41   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
rmalarz wrote:
A fun read. Exposure isn't that confusing. It's actually quite simple, until this sort of thing comes along. Nothing like obsfucating a simple topic.
--Bob



It is only confusing until you internalize it through practice and experience. If you try to think of the detailed math while shooting, you will likely never press the shutter until the opportunity is long passed.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 07:44:28   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
Thanks. You've put some thought and work into that.

Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 08:08:18   #
al13
 
Cany143 wrote:
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!
If I were trying to understand exposure based on t... (show quote)



Reply
Jan 22, 2019 08:40:32   #
Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida
 
I who know nothing about the history or the arithmetic designs of camera construction can only cringe after reading this. We lesser types tend to be more intuitive than analytical , let alone judgmental and as such usually remain silent when others speak.

For they usually know of things that we do not and so we learn to be good listeners as a result and hopefully gain helpful knowledge as a result. And that is a good thing indeed.

I never had Logs in school so it's a useless pursuit for me to even attempt to comprehend that discussion with respect to f/stop or ASA or DIN. With the modern DSLR Camera most of that is a waste of hot air for me personally. Exposure is either Up or Down , Aperture is basically wide vs. narrow , Shutter is either faster or slower and ISO is a means of recalibrating the 3 zones up or down with respect the amount of light available to the camera to balance the 3 zones and deliver a proper image.

Everything else not so much. It's kind of like telling Sir Paul Mc Cartney..."you can't be a musician because you don't read music"....which is true BTW in case any of you are curious.

I will say this ,however, this discussion has prompted me to delve into the history of these items and I should educate myself further so for this I thank you.

What others have said , I can only hope to one day be Worthy of Fellowship among the Hogs. Thank You for tolerating my presence.


Jimbo

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 08:43:02   #
Frisco Loc: San Francisco
 
Fun stuff!

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 08:46:28   #
Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida
 
AMEN ....TIMMERS.....you said it best....Keep it Simple Stupid.....make it fun and please don't make it hard for us out here in Dummyville....



Jimbo

Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 08:55:15   #
srt101fan
 
Blair Shaw Jr wrote:
I who know nothing about the history or the arithmetic designs of camera construction can only cringe after reading this. We lesser types tend to be more intuitive than analytical , let alone judgmental and as such usually remain silent when others speak.

For they usually know of things that we do not and so we learn to be good listeners as a result and hopefully gain helpful knowledge as a result. And that is a good thing indeed.

I never had Logs in school so it's a useless pursuit for me to even attempt to comprehend that discussion with respect to f/stop or ASA or DIN. With the modern DSLR Camera most of that is a waste of hot air for me personally. Exposure is either Up or Down , Aperture is basically wide vs. narrow , Shutter is either faster or slower and ISO is a means of recalibrating the 3 zones up or down with respect the amount of light available to the camera to balance the 3 zones and deliver a proper image.

Everything else not so much. It's kind of like telling Sir Paul Mc Cartney..."you can't be a musician because you don't read music"....which is true BTW in case any of you are curious.

I will say this ,however, this discussion has prompted me to delve into the history of these items and I should educate myself further so for this I thank you.

What others have said , I can only hope to one day be Worthy of Fellowship among the Hogs. Thank You for tolerating my presence.


Jimbo
I who know nothing about the history or the arithm... (show quote)


Jimbo - Your post is a breath of fresh air in a sea of irrelevant mathematical and scientific hogwash.... Thank you for posting.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:20:40   #
BebuLamar
 
Bipod wrote:
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:

TimeValue + ApertureValue = SensitvityValue + Brightness
E.g., at approx. EV 15:
5 + 8 = 5 + 8

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

Brightness = TimeValue + ApertureValue - SensitivtyValue
8 = 5 + 8 - 5

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

f-number APEX
1 0
1.4 1
2 2
2.8 3
4 4
5.6 5
8 6
11 7
16 8
22 9
etc.

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.

Nominal Sec. APEX
1 1 0
2 1/2 1
15 1/15 2
30 1/30 3
60 1/60 4
125 1/125 5
250 1/250 6
500 1/500 7
1000 1/1000 8
etc.

FILM/SENSOR SPEED


ASA DIN APEX
100 21 5
200 22 6
400 23 7
800 24 8
1600 25 9
etc.


BRIGHTNESS

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


APEX FOOT LAMBERTS
1 2
2 4
3 8
4 15
5 30
6 60
7 125
8 250
9 500
10 1000
etc.
It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so co... (show quote)


I search the internet but still not finding out why the APEX system use 5 for ISO 100 which ISO 3 DIN 6 as 0. I have my own system with the shutter speed and aperture the same number as the APEX but I assign ISO 100 as 0.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:24:53   #
BebuLamar
 
BebuLamar wrote:
I search the internet but still not finding out why the APEX system use 5 for ISO 100 which ISO 3 DIN 6 as 0. I have my own system with the shutter speed and aperture the same number as the APEX but I assign ISO 100 as 0.


Well I figured it out now. It was chosen so that the Bv (I call it LV) of 0 is 1 Foot Lambert.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:25:19   #
Dannj
 
DeanS wrote:
I have memorized this, when do I get to take the test?😎😎😎


😂😂
I think you should get an A+ just for reading it.

Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 09:27:18   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
What I have learned about exposure is that the camera does not see the subject the same way that the eye/brain combination does. So you have to figure out how this will impact your photo and to adjust the camera accordingly. To do this, you must have a vision in your brain of what you want the product to look like. End of rant.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:28:53   #
Dannj
 
rmalarz wrote:
A fun read. Exposure isn't that confusing. It's actually quite simple, until this sort of thing comes along. Nothing like obsfucating a simple topic.
--Bob


No offense but it’s hard to accept “fun read” and “obfuscating” in the same comment😊

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:36:21   #
BebuLamar
 
BebuLamar wrote:
Well I figured it out now. It was chosen so that the Bv (I call it LV) of 0 is 1 Foot Lambert.


It also means that their reflected light meter is calibrated with K10 instead of K14 like Pentax and Minota meters. So it would read 1/2 stop too high. Actually Ansel Adams used this value. He claimed that he used no K factor but in fact the way he did it he used K10.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 09:41:43   #
StanMac Loc: Tennessee
 
rmalarz wrote:
A fun read. Exposure isn't that confusing. It's actually quite simple, until this sort of thing comes along. Nothing like obsfucating a simple topic.
--Bob


Yeah, exposure was clear as a bell to me until I read this post!

Stan

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 13 next> last>>
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.