I'm confused about iso
Nov 19, 2023 12:18:41 #
WDCash wrote:
Recient conversations and articles about the new S... (show quote)
Hi WDcash, someone may have posted this, but I didn't have time to read all 16 pages (so far). Film speed is called ASA. For the average photographer outdoor film was around ASA 100. Indoor was usually around 400. For special types of photography, ASA 1000 was available also. For people shooting film, the ASA was fixed and could not be changes in the camera, unlike ISO.
Nov 19, 2023 12:23:47 #
scsdesphotography wrote:
Hi WDcash, someone may have posted this, but I didn't have time to read all 16 pages (so far). Film speed is called ASA. For the average photographer outdoor film was around ASA 100. Indoor was usually around 400. For special types of photography, ASA 1000 was available also. For people shooting film, the ASA was fixed and could not be changes in the camera, unlike ISO.
Film speed has been called ISO for the last half century. ISO is exactly the same as ASA.
Nov 19, 2023 12:37:17 #
selmslie wrote:
Film speed has been called ISO for the last half century. ISO is exactly the same as ASA.
Nov 19, 2023 12:44:16 #
delder
Loc: Maryland
Well, I was shooting ASA on my Dad's Kodak Brownie [620 or 120]
over 65 years ago, I guess that is SO last century. 60 years ago I was STILL shooting roll film on my Yashicaflex. All the film I used was STILL ASA. No problem to me, it's just a number.
In our DIGITAL world, we are blessed with INSTANT replay, so we don't waste an entire roll on bad shots. Also re-enforces our understanding of the Triangle, as we ca remember what we just did.
If we forget later, information is etched into the data!
over 65 years ago, I guess that is SO last century. 60 years ago I was STILL shooting roll film on my Yashicaflex. All the film I used was STILL ASA. No problem to me, it's just a number.
In our DIGITAL world, we are blessed with INSTANT replay, so we don't waste an entire roll on bad shots. Also re-enforces our understanding of the Triangle, as we ca remember what we just did.
If we forget later, information is etched into the data!
Nov 19, 2023 12:47:41 #
delder wrote:
Well, I was shooting ASA on my Dad's Kodak Brownie... (show quote)
Yes, the exposure triangle works just as well with digital as it did with film.
Nov 19, 2023 12:54:33 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
selmslie wrote:
Yes, the exposure triangle works just as well with digital as it did with film.
I never heard of an exposure triangle when I was shooting with film. Never in formal classes, never in informed conversation. Film speed was never treated as a variable...just one of several things to be considered when selecting what film to use.
Nov 19, 2023 13:06:06 #
larryepage wrote:
I never heard of an exposure triangle when I was shooting with film. Never in formal classes, never in informed conversation. Film speed was never treated as a variable...just one of several things to be considered when selecting what film to use.
Nov 19, 2023 13:16:03 #
larryepage wrote:
I never heard of an exposure triangle when I was shooting with film. Never in formal classes, never in informed conversation. Film speed was never treated as a variable...just one of several things to be considered when selecting what film to use.
Probably because for a given roll of film it was a "constant"... for the whole roll.
One had to change rolls to change the film speed.
Nov 19, 2023 13:26:16 #
larryepage wrote:
I never heard of an exposure triangle when I was shooting with film. Never in formal classes, never in informed conversation. Film speed was never treated as a variable...just one of several things to be considered when selecting what film to use.
Neither did I. The term "exposure triangle" was coined much later by people who taught beginners photography in the digital era.
The principles were covered in the Kodak Professional Photoguide and the Kodak Pocket Guide to 35mm Photography which included calculator dials just like the dials on some light meters.
Needless to say, these calculators are now available as smartphone apps. I posted a link to a spreadsheet and associated documentation pack on page 11: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-792241-11.html#14287605
Nov 19, 2023 13:31:25 #
Longshadow wrote:
Probably because for a given roll of film it was a "constant"... for the whole roll.
One had to change rolls to change the film speed.
One had to change rolls to change the film speed.
That probably explains why it ended up getting called the exposure triangle.
In the beginning of the digital era we were still setting the ISO first and then searching for an exposure that would work.
Auto ISO came later and newbies lost the ability to think about what was involved.
Nov 19, 2023 13:35:36 #
selmslie wrote:
That probably explains why it ended up getting called the exposure triangle.
In the beginning of the digital era we were still setting the ISO first and then searching for an exposure that would work.
Auto ISO came later and newbies lost the ability to think about what was involved.
In the beginning of the digital era we were still setting the ISO first and then searching for an exposure that would work.
Auto ISO came later and newbies lost the ability to think about what was involved.
I'm waiting for the AI camera that will allow people to just aim the camera at something, and the camera will say "Hah, don't bother."; "Backup a little."; "Turn to the right a little and aim down some."....
No thinking or abilities required.
Nov 19, 2023 16:56:18 #
petrochemist
Loc: UK
BebuLamar wrote:
I have never run across anyone who described exactly how to rate a sensor ISO.
I gather if you read the ISO standard for rating digital cameras, there are 5 or 6 alternative approaches listed. The manufacturer is free to use whichever they prefer. All will give valves close enough to film ISO to allow old light meters etc to be used successfully so I don't see the fine detail is relevant.
Nov 19, 2023 17:07:48 #
petrochemist wrote:
I gather if you read the ISO standard for rating digital cameras, there are 5 or 6 alternative approaches listed. The manufacturer is free to use whichever they prefer. All will give valves close enough to film ISO to allow old light meters etc to be used successfully so I don't see the fine detail is relevant.
But so many people thrive on minutiae.
Nov 19, 2023 17:20:50 #
petrochemist wrote:
I gather if you read the ISO standard for rating digital cameras, there are 5 or 6 alternative approaches listed. The manufacturer is free to use whichever they prefer. All will give valves close enough to film ISO to allow old light meters etc to be used successfully so I don't see the fine detail is relevant.
Actually a long time ago (around 2005 or so) I read an article by Kodak and they described how to rate the ISO of an image sensor. However, that was not ISO standard.
Nov 19, 2023 17:42:48 #
petrochemist wrote:
I gather if you read the ISO standard for rating digital cameras, there are 5 or 6 alternative approaches listed. The manufacturer is free to use whichever they prefer. All will give valves close enough to film ISO to allow old light meters etc to be used successfully so I don't see the fine detail is relevant.
The ISO standard is a statement, not a regulation. To say that any company complies with the "standard" is an overstatement.
The only thing that cameras need to do is to provide a reasonable image from a standard scene that is not too different from any other camera's. The goal is a reasonable raw file and optionally a reasonable JPEG or TIFF image. The same applies to both traditional cameras and smart phones.
I doubt that any manufacturer loses any sleep over the text in the ISO standard.
If there is any standard at all it is the Exposure Triangle since a camera will always be compared to other existing cameras and meters.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.