Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Why is exposure so confusing?
Page <<first <prev 6 of 13 next> last>>
Jan 22, 2019 12:40:43   #
WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio
 
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)


It's not confusing.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 12:45:50   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
speters wrote:
It appears, exposure is confusing to you (while not to others), because of the suggestions you put out! There is nothing labeled wrong, but in a logical sepuense! I guess you haven't noticed, that the openings are based on pie!


And how many slices of pie determines the quality of the Bokeh!

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 12:55:25   #
nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY
 
Wow, I got so lost in the original post that I have not found my way back yet!
All the effort putting it together could have been better spent in realizing how UNcomplicated it really is!

Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 13:16:38   #
rond-photography Loc: Connecticut
 
Bipod wrote:
It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so confusing.


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?

[/code]
It time someone talked about WHY exposure is so co... (show quote)



Actually, these numbers work as they always have. In the case of shutter speed, each one is double the preceding one:1 X2 =2; 2X2=4; 4X2=8; etc.
Fstops let in double the amount of light of the preceding one (starting with the smallest aperture) so
F16 = 1/2 the light of F22; F11 = 1/2 the light of F16; etc.
So to keep the same exposure for a shutter speed change, you adjust the f-stop by the same amount.
If you double the shutter speed (go from 1/125 to 1/250) then you open up by 1 stop of aperture
(go from say F16 to F11) and you get the same exposure.
Even though my film cameras were all totally manual (for some reason I eschewed the idea of auto exposure and bought a Canon AT-1 even though the AE-1 was available) I now shoot almost totally auto exposure. So I don't really need to think about relationship of f-stop to shutter speed, and I am sure most others don't either. Not sure there would be a value in renumbering camera dials, and it would no longer make sense because shutter speeds going 1,2,3,4 would then be meaningless.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 13:31:10   #
jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana
 
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



Reply
Jan 22, 2019 13:52:40   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
rond-photography wrote:
...Fstops let in double the amount of light of the preceding one (starting with the smallest aperture) so F16 = 1/2 the light of F22; F11 = 1/2 the light of F16; etc. ....

We know you meant twice the light.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 13:54:25   #
jonjacobik Loc: Quincy, MA
 
A simple argument against.

There ain't no zero in photography except when you don't press the shutter.
You can't half zero and you can't double it.

If it doesn't make sense, set it 'A'

There's more light, and less light.
There's more more time, and less time.
There's more sensitivity, and less sensitivity.

That's all.

Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 14:05:55   #
d3200prime
 
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)


Your post really created a buzz storm of controversy and I believe that was your purpose, however, a seasoned photographer has learned by experience not to get tangled up in such nonsense. If the engineers of our space program had tried this with the astronauts we would have never gotten to the moon. This is a ridiculous post.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:13:09   #
davidf_logan Loc: Logan, Utah
 
The sequence of f-stops goes as multiples of Sqrt[2] ~ 1.4 and not by doubling and halving the f-stop. So, if you start with f4 you get f5.6 and f2.8 on either side of it. These correspond to half- as much and twice- as much light, respectively. That's because the area of a circle is proportional to its radius-squared (A = pi r^2). So if you want to double (halve) the amount of light you increase (decrease) the radius (essentially the aperture if the iris were a perfect circle) by a factor of Sqrt[2] ~ 1.4.

Now, if you remember f4 and f5.6, as Timmer suggests, you can generate them all by doubling and interleaving the two series you get.

However, it's not that hard to multiply by 1.4 is it? Start at f2 and remember that 2 ~ 1.4^2

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:16:48   #
BebuLamar
 
davidf_logan wrote:
The sequence of f-stops goes as multiples of Sqrt[2] ~ 1.4 and not by doubling and halving the f-stop. So, if you start with f4 you get f5.6 and f2.8 on either side of it. These correspond to half- as much and twice- as much light, respectively. That's because the area of a circle is proportional to its radius-squared (A = pi r^2). So if you want to double (halve) the amount of light you increase (decrease) the radius (essentially the aperture if the iris were a perfect circle) by a factor of Sqrt[2] ~ 1.4.

Now, if you remember f4 and f5.6, as Timmer suggests, you can generate them all by doubling and interleaving the two series you get.

However, it's not that hard to multiply by 1.4 is it? Start at f2 and remember that 2 ~ 1.4^2
The sequence of f-stops goes as multiples of Sqrt ... (show quote)


It's easier to simply memorize them all. The traditional f/stop numbers are mathematically incorrect any way. The f/5.6 which should be f/5.7. The f/22 should really be f/23. The same thing with the shutter speed as has been pointed out by the OP. They are not simply doubling in each steps. So it's best to simply memorize them.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:18:01   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
d3200prime wrote:
Your post really created a buzz storm of controversy and I believe that was your purpose, however, a seasoned photographer has learned by experience not to get tangled up in such nonsense. If the engineers of our space program had tried this with the astronauts we would have never gotten to the moon. This is a ridiculous post.



Reply
 
 
Jan 22, 2019 14:21:44   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
rond-photography wrote:
Fstops let in double the amount of light of the preceding one (starting with the smallest aperture) so
F16 = 1/2 the light of F22; F11 = 1/2 the light of F16; etc.


F16 lets in more light than F22, not less, and F11 lets in more light than F16.

Mike

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:24:33   #
Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan
 
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)


Another interesting and informative post. Thanks.

Can someone explain to me why in the world this post would be so upsetting to people here?

Mike

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:37:52   #
davidf_logan Loc: Logan, Utah
 
I agree that it's easier, in practice, to memorize them. Still, I think it's important to understand why they are why they are what they are. You're correct that it should be f5.7 by the rules of rounding. Or f5.657... (etc)! I think manufacturers try to go with the physically correct numbers -- so, theoretically, the f5.6 aperture should aim actually to let in half the light of f4 and so is, ideally, constructed to be as close as possible to f5.657 -- but, obviously, there will be some, possibly significant, error -- which are where T-stops come in (mainly) for movie lenses.

Reply
Jan 22, 2019 14:56:40   #
jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana
 
Bipod wrote:
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...

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.


BTW, sloscheider, how's that Brexit thing working out for you?
True enough. Just imagine the cost of everyone ... (show quote)


Two types of wrenches? that’s reality now because of those #$%^& metrics.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 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.